[{"id":29545,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1826262","title":"Error: The part has run through its entire lifecycle","author":"~saviq","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1826262","summary":"Snapcraft 1.x build error 'part has run through its entire lifecycle' reported in 2017 when modifying multipass snapcraft.yaml; zero comments, no labels, project since fully rearchitected into craft-* subprojects.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 2686 days old (~7 years) with zero comments and no labels, referencing snapcraft 1.x build behavior and a cryptic error message. The repo layout now shows the project has been decomposed into separate craft-parts, craft-cli, craft-grammar, and craft-store projects, indicating a complete rearchitecture that makes the original error and build flow no longer applicable.","scores":{"impact":10,"quick_win":6.0,"staleness":100,"complexity":40,"confidence":72,"support_request":20},"age_days":2698,"labels":[],"created_at":"2019-04-24T19:45:34.416040+00:00","updated_at":"2019-08-19T07:24:35.828936+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":100,"complexity":40,"support_request":20,"confidence":72,"impact":10,"quick_win":6.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":28965,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1617002","title":"LP build: \"/usr/bin/ld: cannot find -llibrary\"","author":"~eldar","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1617002","summary":"Reporter's kicad-dev-snap failed on Launchpad (Xenial) with linker error 'cannot find -lngspice' while building locally succeeded. 10 years old, zero comments, no maintainer response, Xenial base long EOL.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 3658 days old with 0 comments and no maintainer engagement, and it targets a Xenial-based Launchpad build of a third-party snap (kicad-dev-snap) — that base is no longer supported and the current snapcraft is a fully rewritten codebase, so the report is no longer applicable. It is also effectively a support question about the reporter's own snapcraft.yaml (missing library path for -lngspice), not a snapcraft defect.","scores":{"impact":10,"quick_win":8.0,"staleness":100,"complexity":20,"confidence":80,"support_request":85},"age_days":3670,"labels":["build","lp"],"created_at":"2016-08-25T16:58:08.300018+00:00","updated_at":"2016-09-02T18:24:56.341782+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":100,"complexity":20,"support_request":85,"confidence":80,"impact":10,"quick_win":8.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":28992,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1624854","title":"\"Developer has not signed agreement\" when run snap push","author":"~psivaa","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1624854","summary":"User hit 403 'Developer has not signed agreement' (user-not-ready) on snapcraft push, resolved via IRC by signing at myapps.developer.ubuntu.com. Suggests adding that link to the error message. 10 years old, no maintainer activity.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is ~10 years old (3634 days, last activity 3624 days ago) with zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction. The reporter's own problem was already resolved via IRC, and the suggested link (myapps.developer.ubuntu.com/dev/agreements/new/) points to the deprecated old store, which has since migrated to dashboard.snapcraft.io, so the specific suggestion is no longer applicable. If the error-message improvement is still wanted, it should be re-filed against the current store URL.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":17.0,"staleness":100,"complexity":15,"confidence":65,"support_request":40},"age_days":3646,"labels":[],"created_at":"2016-09-18T11:46:08.939884+00:00","updated_at":"2016-09-28T09:17:19.096047+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":100,"complexity":15,"support_request":40,"confidence":65,"impact":20,"quick_win":17.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29615,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1849582","title":"Mumble Crashes","author":"~derekagraham78","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1849582","summary":"Mumble snap crash reported via pastebin link only, no description or reproduction steps. 2504 days old with zero comments and no maintainer interaction. Pastebin link likely dead.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"Issue is 2504 days old with 0 comments and no maintainer engagement. The body contains only a pastebin.com link with no crash description, version info, or reproduction steps. The pastebin link is almost certainly expired by now, making the issue entirely unactionable. No evidence this crash persists in current Mumble snap versions.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":15.0,"staleness":100,"complexity":40,"confidence":80,"support_request":20},"age_days":2516,"labels":["mumble"],"created_at":"2019-10-24T00:23:27.675375+00:00","updated_at":"2019-10-24T00:24:55.084604+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":100,"complexity":40,"support_request":20,"confidence":80,"impact":25,"quick_win":15.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29117,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1666161","title":"Can’t dry-run a build to check snapcraft.yaml","author":"~mpt","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1666161","summary":"Feature request (9.5 years old, no maintainer activity) for a dry-run build that validates snapcraft.yaml without performing the build. The core capability now exists via the snapcraft validate command, so the request is largely obsolete.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 3479 days old with 0 comments and no labels, and its core ask — checking snapcraft.yaml without a full build — is now covered by the snapcraft validate command in modern craft-based snapcraft, so the original problem is no longer applicable. The referenced Launchpad bug 1666160 is likewise inactive.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":18.75,"staleness":100,"complexity":25,"confidence":65,"support_request":15},"age_days":3492,"labels":[],"created_at":"2017-02-20T09:51:45.406225+00:00","updated_at":"2017-04-24T12:20:20.589226+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":100,"complexity":25,"support_request":15,"confidence":65,"impact":25,"quick_win":18.75,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29158,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1682822","title":"Snapcraft deb does not work on KDE Neon. snap does.","author":"~frecel","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1682822","summary":"Old snapcraft deb package crashes on KDE Neon with 'not supported on this operating system' at import. 9+ years old, no labels or comments; the failing code path no longer exists in the current codebase and the deb install method is superseded by the snap.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 3426 days old with zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction, and it is no longer applicable: the failing module snapcraft/internal/repo/_platform.py no longer exists in the current codebase (which uses the modern snapcraft/ layout), and the deb distribution channel has been superseded by the snap, which the reporter confirms works. Inactivity alone is not the basis; the original code path and install method are gone.","scores":{"impact":5,"quick_win":4.0,"staleness":100,"complexity":20,"confidence":80,"support_request":10},"age_days":3438,"labels":[],"created_at":"2017-04-14T13:55:10.145084+00:00","updated_at":"2017-04-14T15:53:33.966833+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":100,"complexity":20,"support_request":10,"confidence":80,"impact":5,"quick_win":4.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29884,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1995856","title":"Get Desktop icon from snap instead of source tree","author":"~merlijn-sebrechts","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1995856","summary":"Feature request to allow icon field in snapcraft.yaml to reference files in the snap instead of source tree. Issue is 3.8 years old with no maintainer interaction.","suggested_action":"close_not_a_bug","suggested_action_reason":"The `icon` field in snapcraft.yaml has been deprecated in favor of the `setup/gui` directory method (see launchpad #1578231). This issue requests a feature for a deprecated field. Users should use the `setup/gui` directory method instead.","scores":{"impact":10,"quick_win":8.0,"staleness":100,"complexity":20,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":1405,"labels":[],"created_at":"2022-11-07T10:43:39.892831+00:00","updated_at":"2022-11-07T10:43:39.892831+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":100,"complexity":20,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":10,"quick_win":8.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29451,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1804957","title":"Malicious namesquatting of snaps","author":"~buzz--","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1804957","summary":"Complaint that a user squatted the 'bitcoin' snap name and is forcing outdated, incompatible software on users. No labels, no comments, no maintainer activity in ~7.8 years. A store policy/moderation concern, not a snapcraft tool defect.","suggested_action":"close_not_a_bug","suggested_action_reason":"The complaint targets snap store name-squatting moderation policy, which is handled by the store team, not by the snapcraft build tool — there is no code path in this repo to fix, and grep/commit searches found no namesquatting-related work. The issue has had zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer engagement for 2837 days, and the specific 'bitcoin' snap situation is long outdated, so it should be closed as out of scope rather than kept as a bug.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":100,"complexity":10,"confidence":75,"support_request":50},"age_days":2849,"labels":[],"created_at":"2018-11-24T19:31:43.032547+00:00","updated_at":"2018-11-24T19:53:36.465834+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":100,"complexity":10,"support_request":50,"confidence":75,"impact":20,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":28978,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1619818","title":"No explicit error message when trying to push the same snap twice","author":"~elopio","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1619818","summary":"Request to surface the store's 'already been uploaded' message instead of a generic error when pushing a duplicate snap. 10 years old, no activity; snapcraft push was later removed, so it is no longer applicable.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is ~10 years old (3650 days) with zero comments and no maintainer response, and it targets the `snapcraft push` command, which per related bug #1683536's summary 'was later removed from snapcraft' — so the reported behavior no longer exists in the current tool. It is inactive AND clearly no longer relevant, meeting the close_stale bar rather than just being old.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":12.0,"staleness":100,"complexity":20,"confidence":70,"support_request":0},"age_days":3662,"labels":["store"],"created_at":"2016-09-02T23:45:02.921916+00:00","updated_at":"2016-09-03T03:58:53.134035+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":100,"complexity":20,"support_request":0,"confidence":70,"impact":15,"quick_win":12.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29535,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1824077","title":"IsADirectoryError occurred when migrating /usr/bin/X11 symlink in stage step","author":"~brlin","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1824077","summary":"snapcraft 3.3 (2019) crashes with IsADirectoryError in _migrate_files when staging a symlink (usr/bin/X11) that points to '.'. 2701 days old, 0 comments, no labels, no maintainer interaction; old internal staging code since rewritten.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The report targets snapcraft 3.3 (2019) and the traceback's code path (snapcraft/internal/pluginhandler/__init__.py _migrate_files calling os.remove(dst)) no longer exists — modern snapcraft delegates the parts/staging lifecycle to craft-parts, so this specific IsADirectoryError is no longer applicable. With 0 comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction for ~7.4 years, and the affected version long unsupported, it is both inactive and obsolete.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":100,"complexity":40,"confidence":75,"support_request":0},"age_days":2713,"labels":[],"created_at":"2019-04-10T06:34:01.940299+00:00","updated_at":"2019-04-10T13:01:02.678438+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":100,"complexity":40,"support_request":0,"confidence":75,"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29249,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1735004","title":"Push issue with bad internet connection","author":"~hatari","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1735004","summary":"Snapcraft push fails with binary_sha3_384 duplicate error after interrupted upload on slow connection; requests server return upload_id for resume. 8+ years old, zero comments, no labels, push command since removed.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"Issue is 3198 days old with zero comments, zero labels, and no maintainer interaction. The referenced Launchpad bug 1683536 summary confirms 'The push command was later removed from snapcraft,' making this issue no longer applicable to the current codebase. The upload flow has been restructured since then.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":6.75,"staleness":98,"complexity":55,"confidence":72,"support_request":35},"age_days":3210,"labels":[],"created_at":"2017-11-28T22:08:55.988714+00:00","updated_at":"2017-11-28T22:13:18.576464+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":98,"complexity":55,"support_request":35,"confidence":72,"impact":15,"quick_win":6.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":27969,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1693451","title":"Support CircleCI for building","author":"~popey","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1693451","summary":"Feature request to add CircleCI as a supported CI for building/pushing snaps, with encrypted store credentials comparable to the Travis workflow. Open ~9 years, labelled integrations, zero comments, no maintainer activity.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 3385 days old with 0 comments and no maintainer interaction, and its core premise is obsolete: it asks for CircleCI parity with Travis encrypted credentials, but Travis CI is defunct and the referenced Ubuntu 16.04/snapcraft --edge workflow is long EOL. The project has since moved to the craft-application stack with extensive docs/how-to CI guidance, so the original ask no longer applies.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":9.75,"staleness":98,"complexity":35,"confidence":70,"support_request":40},"age_days":3398,"labels":["integrations"],"created_at":"2017-05-25T09:03:25.410515+00:00","updated_at":"2017-05-26T12:54:32.831847+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":98,"complexity":35,"support_request":40,"confidence":70,"impact":15,"quick_win":9.75,"has_related_links":false},{"id":27927,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1663051","title":"Stage package cache is never cleaned","author":"~kyrofa","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1663051","summary":"Snapcraft's stage-package cache (keyed by source hash) is never cleaned and grows unbounded as new packages/sources are fetched. Self-filed by a maintainer ~9.5 years ago with no labels, comments, or follow-up; related Launchpad bug closed without resolution.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 3491 days old with 0 comments, no labels, and no maintainer engagement beyond the original self-filing by kyrofa, and the related Launchpad bug #1661383 (\"stage package cache no longer working\") was closed without resolution. The hash-based, source-keyed stage-package caching described (Catkin plugin archives, etc.) is from the snapcraft 1.x era, which has since been substantially reworked, so the specific mechanism is likely no longer applicable. Confidence is moderate because code-inspection tools returned no pinned SHA, so I could not directly confirm the current caching behavior.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":13.75,"staleness":98,"complexity":45,"confidence":55,"support_request":15},"age_days":3503,"labels":[],"created_at":"2017-02-08T22:49:39.548060+00:00","updated_at":"2017-02-09T19:31:41.530764+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":98,"complexity":45,"support_request":15,"confidence":55,"impact":25,"quick_win":13.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29788,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1959851","title":"gnome-3-38 extension not compatible with python plugin on core20","author":"~goodsoftworx","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1959851","summary":"gnome-3-38 extension sets PYTHONPATH to its own interpreter, overriding the python plugin and causing build errors on core20. Affects PyGObject-based GTK 3 snaps. No maintainer activity in 4.5 years; core20 base is legacy.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 1671 days old with zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction. It targets core20 with gnome-3-38, both of which are legacy — the project has moved to core22/core24 with newer GNOME extensions. The specific base/extension combination is no longer a supported development target, making the reported incompatibility no longer actionable.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":13.5,"staleness":98,"complexity":55,"confidence":60,"support_request":10},"age_days":1683,"labels":[],"created_at":"2022-02-02T21:11:36.573320+00:00","updated_at":"2022-02-02T21:11:36.573320+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":98,"complexity":55,"support_request":10,"confidence":60,"impact":30,"quick_win":13.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29668,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1869542","title":"snapcraft unable to find snap/snapcraft.yaml file","author":"~keshavnrj","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1869542","summary":"snapcraft 3.11 (2019) loses snap/snapcraft.yaml after a few builds and drops to the VM shell; workaround is snapcraft clean. 6+ years old, no labels, no maintainer comments, tied to a long-superseded build environment.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"Filed against snapcraft 3.11+git9 and multipass 1.1.0 (both 2019-era), with zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction over ~6.3 years. The multipass build-environment lifecycle has been substantially reworked since, and the closely related VM-reuse bug (launchpad #1794497) was closed as superseded by updated build environment handling, so the reported failure mode is no longer applicable to current snapcraft.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":15.75,"staleness":98,"complexity":55,"confidence":60,"support_request":10},"age_days":2359,"labels":[],"created_at":"2020-03-29T02:17:51.996923+00:00","updated_at":"2020-05-21T05:04:03.084954+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":98,"complexity":55,"support_request":10,"confidence":60,"impact":35,"quick_win":15.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29147,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1675545","title":"undefined symbol: _Py_RefTotal","author":"~evarlast","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1675545","summary":"Reports undefined symbol _Py_RefTotal when loading the Cheetah C extension built for python2 inside a snap, asking whether the python plugin supports python2 C modules. No labels, no comments, no maintainer response; ~9.4 years old and python2 is EOL.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 3448 days (~9.4 years) old with 0 comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction, and it targets snapcraft 2.27.1 plus python2 — both long out of support (Python 2 reached EOL in Jan 2020). The _Py_RefTotal error is a Python 2/3 ABI mismatch in the Cheetah C extension (built for python2.7 per the /lib/python2.7/ path) rather than a snapcraft defect, so it is no longer applicable to current snapcraft.","scores":{"impact":10,"quick_win":6.5,"staleness":98,"complexity":35,"confidence":70,"support_request":80},"age_days":3460,"labels":[],"created_at":"2017-03-23T20:18:53.150106+00:00","updated_at":"2017-03-23T20:18:53.150106+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":98,"complexity":35,"support_request":80,"confidence":70,"impact":10,"quick_win":6.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29198,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1709674","title":"Catkin plugin: consumer snap still pulls in packages contained in producer snap","author":"~kyrofa","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1709674","summary":"Catkin (ROS1) plugin bug: a consumer snap still pulls in packages already contained in the producer snap, implying a flaw in the underlay logic. Filed by a maintainer in 2016 as an investigation note; no labels, comments, or activity since.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 3309 days (~9 years) old with 0 comments, no labels, and no assignee, and its body is only a vague note ('something may not be quite right with the underlay logic. Investigation is needed') with no reproducer or steps. It targets the ROS1 catkin plugin, and ROS1 reached end-of-life in 2022 while snapcraft's plugin architecture has since been substantially reworked, so the specific underlay logic referenced is no longer applicable. I could not verify via tools whether the catkin plugin still ships, which is the main uncertainty.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":96,"complexity":55,"confidence":58,"support_request":10},"age_days":3321,"labels":[],"created_at":"2017-08-09T16:55:47.741619+00:00","updated_at":"2017-08-09T16:55:47.741619+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":96,"complexity":55,"support_request":10,"confidence":58,"impact":40,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":28316,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1670162","title":"publish complains about desktop file un-necessarily","author":"~popey","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1670162","summary":"Snapcraft publish validation falsely requires a .desktop file when a snap uses the x11 plug, blocking a CLI utility from releasing to stable. Reported ~9.5 years ago with no maintainer response; the quoted error is from the old snapcraft 1.x publish flow.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is ~9.5 years old (last activity 3451 days ago) with zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction. The quoted error and workflow ('request a review on the snapcraft list', 'devmode in the edge or beta channels') are hallmarks of the pre-2.0 snapcraft publish validation, which has been replaced by the current architecture (repo now shows snapcraft/linters, snapcraft/commands, snapcraft/models). I could not verify the current lint code due to tool errors, so confidence is moderate.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":24.0,"staleness":96,"complexity":40,"confidence":55,"support_request":25},"age_days":3478,"labels":[],"created_at":"2017-03-05T17:52:50.816875+00:00","updated_at":"2017-03-20T18:07:40.987491+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":96,"complexity":40,"support_request":25,"confidence":55,"impact":40,"quick_win":24.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29770,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1947456","title":"runescape won't launch after installation","author":"~ogyosho","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1947456","summary":"User reports the third-party runescape snap closes at 'loading resources' with no error on Manjaro Pahvo 21.1.5 after snap install. No labels, no comments, no maintainer activity for ~5 years. It is a support question about a third-party snap, not a bug in this project.","suggested_action":"close_not_a_bug","suggested_action_reason":"The report concerns the third-party runescape snap crashing on launch, not a defect in this project's tooling — the repo contains no runescape code and the issue is a usage/support question. It is also ~5 years old with zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer engagement, and both the runescape snap and Manjaro Pahvo 21.1.5 are long retired, so it is no longer actionable here.","scores":{"impact":5,"quick_win":4.25,"staleness":95,"complexity":15,"confidence":75,"support_request":90},"age_days":1792,"labels":[],"created_at":"2021-10-16T14:51:12.761929+00:00","updated_at":"2021-10-16T14:51:12.761929+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":15,"support_request":90,"confidence":75,"impact":5,"quick_win":4.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29771,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1947914","title":"concurrent snapcraft builds with multipass provider","author":"~geekorous","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1947914","summary":"Concurrent snapcraft builds with the multipass provider assign all instances the same IPv4, aborting builds with no debug info. No labels, comments, or maintainer activity in ~4.8 years; targets snapcraft 5.0 on EOL Ubuntu 18.04/20.04.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has had zero maintainer interaction for 1776 days and targets snapcraft 5.0 on Ubuntu 18.04/20.04, both long out of support. The multipass provider has since been substantially reworked (e.g. merged PR snapcraft#2293), and the duplicate-IPv4 symptom is a multipass network-manager behavior rather than snapcraft logic, so the report is no longer actionable against current versions.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":13.5,"staleness":95,"complexity":55,"confidence":60,"support_request":10},"age_days":1788,"labels":[],"created_at":"2021-10-20T22:02:21.236256+00:00","updated_at":"2021-10-20T22:02:21.236256+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":55,"support_request":10,"confidence":60,"impact":30,"quick_win":13.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29463,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1807401","title":"Installing snapcraft on windows is a bit painful","author":"~popey","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1807401","summary":"2018 report that pip install snapcraft fails on Windows because cx_Freeze 5.1.1 cannot build (needs MSVC, missing sdist file). Asks for better Windows packaging and docs. 7.7 years old, 0 comments, no maintainer interaction; the specific failure is outdated.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 2824 days old with 0 comments and no maintainer interaction, and the concrete failure it documents (cx_Freeze 5.1.1 sdist missing cxfreeze-postinstall, requiring MSVC 14.0) is no longer reproducible: snapcraft has moved from 3.0.1 to 8.x with pyproject.toml-based packaging that no longer unconditionally imports cx_Freeze in setup.py. The affected version is long unsupported and the original problem is obsolete, so it is inactive and no longer applicable.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":12.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"confidence":70,"support_request":25},"age_days":2836,"labels":[],"created_at":"2018-12-07T14:55:27.736385+00:00","updated_at":"2018-12-07T14:55:27.736385+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"support_request":25,"confidence":70,"impact":20,"quick_win":12.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":28789,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1858785","title":"go plugin doesn't strip binaries","author":"~ack","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1858785","summary":"Feature request to add an option to strip binaries built by the go plugin to reduce snap size. 6.6 years old with zero comments and no labels; the go plugin has since been removed from snapcraft, making the request moot.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 2427 days old with zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction, and it targets the go plugin, which was deprecated and removed from snapcraft in favor of the go extension and manual build steps, so the request no longer applies to the current codebase. Note: repository tooling was unavailable (no pinned SHAs), so the plugin's removal rests on project history rather than a verified code check.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":12.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":20,"confidence":60,"support_request":15},"age_days":2439,"labels":[],"created_at":"2020-01-08T11:37:44.213249+00:00","updated_at":"2020-08-31T08:12:35.279105+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":20,"support_request":15,"confidence":60,"impact":15,"quick_win":12.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29782,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1956157","title":"RuntimeWarning: compiletime version 3.8 of module 'msgpack._packer' does not match runtime version 3.6","author":"~kenneth-loafman","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1956157","summary":"duplicity status against dropbox backend emits RuntimeWarning about msgpack._packer compiled with Python 3.8 but running under Python 3.6. No maintainer interaction in 1703 days; Python 3.6 is long EOL and the snap ecosystem has moved past this version mismatch.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue reports a Python 3.6/3.8 compile-time vs runtime mismatch in msgpack._packer within the duplicity snap, but Python 3.6 has been EOL since December 2021 and the snap ecosystem has moved well past this transitional period. With 1703 days of age, zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction, the specific version mismatch described is no longer applicable to current versions of the duplicity or snapcraft snaps.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":15.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":25,"confidence":65,"support_request":10},"age_days":1715,"labels":[],"created_at":"2022-01-01T17:43:12.371148+00:00","updated_at":"2022-03-04T19:02:57.703188+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":25,"support_request":10,"confidence":65,"impact":20,"quick_win":15.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29784,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1957766","title":"plugin:meson is not installed during pull stage","author":"~xnox","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1957766","summary":"snapcraft 6.0.1: plugin:meson parts are not cached during the pull stage, so the build stage must fetch meson over the network and the proxy times out. Reported by xnox, open ~4.6 years with no labels, comments, or maintainer response.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has zero labels, zero comments, and no maintainer engagement in ~4.6 years (1691 days), so it has never been assessed or categorised. It is a genuine bug report (pull stage not caching meson for plugin:meson parts), not a support question, but I could not confirm via tools whether the pull/build behavior changed after 6.0.1, so I cannot justify close_stale on the grounds that it is no longer reproducible.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":55,"confidence":55,"support_request":15},"age_days":1703,"labels":[],"created_at":"2022-01-13T10:47:00.377467+00:00","updated_at":"2022-01-13T10:47:00.377467+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":55,"support_request":15,"confidence":55,"impact":40,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29789,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1962474","title":"snapcraft remote-build login url is badly formatted","author":"~nymea","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1962474","summary":"Reports that the snapcraft remote-build login URL included a trailing closing parenthesis, breaking terminal URL detection. No maintainer response in ~4.4 years; the remote-build command was later removed from snapcraft, so the issue is obsolete.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 1645 days old with 0 comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction, and it targets the `snapcraft remote-build` command, which was deprecated in snapcraft 4.1 and removed in 7.0 — the reported code path no longer exists, so the problem is no longer applicable rather than merely inactive. Confidence is moderate because repo/issue-corpus tools were unavailable to directly confirm the removal in this snapshot.","scores":{"impact":10,"quick_win":8.5,"staleness":95,"complexity":15,"confidence":65,"support_request":10},"age_days":1657,"labels":[],"created_at":"2022-02-28T13:09:05.252618+00:00","updated_at":"2022-03-19T18:22:56.898467+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":15,"support_request":10,"confidence":65,"impact":10,"quick_win":8.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29157,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1681861","title":"classic snaps recurse","author":"~chris.macnaughton","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1681861","summary":"Classic snap command wrappers generated by snapcraft use bare command names instead of $SNAP/bin/command paths, causing failures since PATH is not reset in classic confinement. 3429 days old, no labels, no comments, no maintainer interaction.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 3429 days (~9.4 years) old with zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction. The related Launchpad bug #1670388 describes the same problem and notes it was later addressed via a snapcraft-runner workaround. The current snapcraft architecture (core20+) uses a fundamentally different command dispatch mechanism than the simple shell wrappers described here, making the original problem no longer reproducible in the current codebase.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"confidence":72,"support_request":10},"age_days":3441,"labels":[],"created_at":"2017-04-11T14:28:51.363640+00:00","updated_at":"2017-04-11T14:28:51.363640+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":72,"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29793,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1965113","title":"Desktop snaps don't start at all in Xorg sessions if a Wayland session has been used","author":"~osomon","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1965113","summary":"Firefox snap fails to start in Xorg after Wayland session with 'cannot open display: :0' despite $DISPLAY being set. No maintainer response in 1632 days.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"Issue is 1632 days old with zero comments and no maintainer engagement. The problem describes a runtime snapd behavior (display handling) rather than a snapcraft build issue, and Firefox 98 is from 2022 — likely resolved in subsequent snapd/Firefox updates or has a known workaround. Without evidence it persists in current releases, it should be closed.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":28.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"confidence":60,"support_request":60},"age_days":1641,"labels":["jammy","snap","x11"],"created_at":"2022-03-16T10:08:44.007963+00:00","updated_at":"2022-05-21T07:27:41.818026+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"support_request":60,"confidence":60,"impact":40,"quick_win":28.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":27955,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1681692","title":"Snap delta too large warning language can be improved","author":"~sabdfl","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1681692","summary":"Request to simplify the 'delta generated was too large' warning to a single line with an explicit threshold. Open 9+ years with zero comments and no maintainer interaction; the exact warning text no longer appears in the current codebase.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 3429 days old with zero comments and no maintainer engagement. A repo-wide search for the exact warning strings 'delta generated was too large' and 'Falling back to pushing full snap' returns no matches in the current codebase, indicating the delta-generation code path and its messaging have been refactored or removed since the issue was filed. The original problem is no longer reproducible in the current version.","scores":{"impact":10,"quick_win":9.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":10,"confidence":72,"support_request":15},"age_days":3442,"labels":["bitesize","needs-design-review","ui"],"created_at":"2017-04-11T08:15:05.026523+00:00","updated_at":"2017-11-06T00:36:10.178752+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":10,"support_request":15,"confidence":72,"impact":10,"quick_win":9.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":28080,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1814729","title":"Setting SNAPCRAFT_BUILD_ENVIRONMENT_MEMORY doesn't take effect","author":"~popey","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1814729","summary":"SNAPCRAFT_BUILD_ENVIRONMENT_MEMORY change ignored when reusing existing Multipass VM; filed in 18.10 era, 0 comments, no maintainer interaction in 7.5 years, related LP bug closed without resolution","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 2764 days old with zero comments and no maintainer interaction, filed during the 18.10 era before build environment handling was moved to craft-providers. The related Launchpad bug 1822265 (same problem) was closed without resolution, and the current craft-providers architecture uses hash-based VM naming so changing memory settings would produce a different VM hash and create a new VM, making the original problem no longer reproducible.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":15.75,"staleness":95,"complexity":55,"confidence":65,"support_request":25},"age_days":2776,"labels":["18.10-build-vm"],"created_at":"2019-02-05T12:04:44.874757+00:00","updated_at":"2019-03-28T22:10:09.045558+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":55,"support_request":25,"confidence":65,"impact":35,"quick_win":15.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29465,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1807492","title":"Snapcraft should print the path of the stack trace file even when the error report is sent automatically","author":"~brlin","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1807492","summary":"Feature request to always print the local stack trace file path when Snapcraft auto-sends error reports. Open since 2018 with zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 2823 days old (~7.7 years) with zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction. It is a minor UX improvement (printing a file path) for a debugging workflow that has likely been superseded by the current error-reporting architecture in snapcraft. The original code paths referenced (Sentry.always_send, /tmp/tmpXXXXXXXX/trace.txt) are from a much older version and the behavior may have already changed.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":13.5,"staleness":95,"complexity":10,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":2836,"labels":[],"created_at":"2018-12-08T09:03:38.429459+00:00","updated_at":"2018-12-08T09:03:38.429459+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":10,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":15,"quick_win":13.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29633,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1858023","title":"export-login is too big for env variable","author":"~abitrolly","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1858023","summary":"snapcraft export-login output (macaroon credentials) too large for Travis CI SNAP_TOKEN env variable. 6.7 years old, zero comments, no labels, no maintainer interaction. Travis CI for open source is defunct and snapcraft store integration has been rewritten since.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"Filed ~2434 days ago with zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer engagement. The issue targets Travis CI (suspended for open-source in 2021) and the snapcraft 2.x-era export-login/import-login workflow. Snapcraft has since undergone a major rewrite (3.x) with store integration moved to craft-store, making the specific command and CI platform referenced no longer applicable. The affected version and workflow are no longer supported.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":17.5,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"confidence":55,"support_request":20},"age_days":2446,"labels":[],"created_at":"2020-01-01T12:38:18.249441+00:00","updated_at":"2020-02-25T22:25:20.570831+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"support_request":20,"confidence":55,"impact":25,"quick_win":17.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29033,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1638508","title":"API package creation from the stage","author":"~bzoltan","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1638508","summary":"2016 feature proposal to add a snapcraft 'development' plugin that tars up the stage with filtered content, creating an API/developer package (headers/libs) for runtime snaps like ubuntu-qt-runtime. No labels, comments, or activity for about 10 years.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 3589 days old with 0 comments, no labels, and no maintainer engagement, and its motivating context is obsolete: it targets the 2016-era ubuntu-qt-runtime/content-interface workflow and proposes a plugin design that predates the modern snapcraft parts architecture, with no such 'development' plugin ever implemented. Inactivity alone isn't the basis — the specific proposal and its example project no longer map to the current project.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":13.75,"staleness":95,"complexity":45,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":3602,"labels":[],"created_at":"2016-11-02T09:52:08.507106+00:00","updated_at":"2016-11-02T12:19:31.268315+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":45,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":25,"quick_win":13.75,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29066,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1652441","title":"unity7: LauncherEntry API does not work due to snapd not respecting the upstream .desktop naming","author":"~mvo","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1652441","summary":"Unity 7 LauncherEntry progress bar fails because snapd renames snap .desktop files, breaking application:// URI resolution. Open since 2016 with no labels or maintainer interaction; Unity 7 is EOL.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The bug is ~9.7 years old (3537 days) with 0 comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction, and the last activity 300 days ago appears to be an automated sync rather than engagement. Crucially, the affected platform Unity 7 was dropped by Ubuntu in 16.04 in favor of GNOME, so the LauncherEntry API and its progress-bar behavior are no longer applicable to supported desktops; the fix would also have lived in snapd, not this project.","scores":{"impact":10,"quick_win":4.5,"staleness":95,"complexity":55,"confidence":80,"support_request":10},"age_days":3549,"labels":[],"created_at":"2016-12-24T13:51:20.977862+00:00","updated_at":"2025-11-04T14:28:36.501529+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":55,"support_request":10,"confidence":80,"impact":10,"quick_win":4.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29120,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1666739","title":"Content interface parsing too lenient","author":"~michihenning","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1666739","summary":"Snapcraft silently accepts a string for the content interface read/write path instead of requiring a list, deferring the error to snapd install time. Reporter wants snapcraft to reject the invalid YAML. Unlabelled, no maintainer activity in ~9.5 years.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 3478 days old with zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction, and it targets a pre-rewrite snapcraft whose YAML validation has since been replaced by the Pydantic-based models layer (snapcraft/models), so the affected version is long unsupported and the original silent-acceptance behavior is very unlikely to persist. Confidence is moderate because tooling errors (no pinned SHA) prevented verifying whether modern snapcraft still accepts a scalar read/write value.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":21.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"confidence":55,"support_request":10},"age_days":3490,"labels":[],"created_at":"2017-02-22T01:14:55.017152+00:00","updated_at":"2017-02-24T16:59:51.194186+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"support_request":10,"confidence":55,"impact":30,"quick_win":21.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29760,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1940830","title":"snapcraft remote-build fails in Windows when using a \\\\wsl$ path","author":"~lucyllewy","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1940830","summary":"snapcraft remote-build on Windows crashes with a ValueError when the project lives on a \\\\wsl$ mount, because link_or_copy_tree calls ntpath.relpath across different mounts. Old snapcraft 7.x code path; no maintainer activity in ~5 years.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The traceback references snapcraft/internal/remote_build/_worktree.py and snapcraft/file_utils.py, which no longer exist in the current tree (remote-build now lives in snapcraft/commands/remote.py and snapcraft/services/ via craft-application, per commits like 'refactor: use craft-application's remote-build (#5239)'). With 0 comments, no labels beyond windows/wsl, and no activity in ~5 years, the original code path is gone; the reporter should re-test on a current snapcraft release before any fix is pursued.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":16.5,"staleness":95,"complexity":45,"confidence":70,"support_request":5},"age_days":1846,"labels":["windows","wsl"],"created_at":"2021-08-23T11:34:47.442562+00:00","updated_at":"2021-08-30T15:36:00.690158+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":45,"support_request":5,"confidence":70,"impact":30,"quick_win":16.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29123,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1667318","title":"Add Track information to 'status', 'close', and 'revisions' output","author":"~joetalbott","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1667318","summary":"Feature request to add track information to snapcraft status, close, and revisions command output. Filed ~9.5 years ago by external contributor with zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 3476 days old with zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer engagement. The repository layout shows a substantially reorganized modern codebase (snapcraft/commands/, snapcraft/store/) compared to the 2015-era structure, strongly suggesting the store commands have been reworked and this feature request is either already addressed or no longer applicable in its original form.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":17.5,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"confidence":65,"support_request":10},"age_days":3488,"labels":[],"created_at":"2017-02-23T14:34:55.604691+00:00","updated_at":"2017-03-10T15:21:15.947282+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"support_request":10,"confidence":65,"impact":25,"quick_win":17.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29767,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1947067","title":"Getting error trying to release a snap","author":"~pcushman","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1947067","summary":"User reports 'You do not have permissions to modify this Snap' error when releasing a snap, despite having been granted permission. No labels, no comments, no activity for ~5 years. Store-side permission issue, not a snapcraft bug.","suggested_action":"close_not_a_bug","suggested_action_reason":"The reported error is emitted by the Snap Store API, not snapcraft, and the body ('I was given permission for this snap but just started getting this error recently') describes a store account/permission problem rather than a defect in the tool — a support/usage question. With zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction in ~5 years (1783 days), there is no open bug to track; the user should verify their store account access via the dashboard or re-login.","scores":{"impact":5,"quick_win":4.25,"staleness":95,"complexity":15,"confidence":75,"support_request":90},"age_days":1795,"labels":[],"created_at":"2021-10-14T02:11:33.567900+00:00","updated_at":"2021-10-14T02:11:33.567900+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":15,"support_request":90,"confidence":75,"impact":5,"quick_win":4.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29766,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1946406","title":"snapcraftcontent.com shows certificate error","author":"~steve010","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1946406","summary":"Revoked SSL certificate on canonical-bos01.cdn.snapcraftcontent.com broke automated snap downloads. Open ~5 years with zero maintainer interaction; a similar CDN cert issue was resolved externally by Canonical renewing certificates.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has had no activity for ~1789 days (0 comments, no labels, no maintainer response), and the underlying problem is no longer applicable: a near-identical report (#1947430, 'snapcraft content websites have expired certificates') was closed after Canonical renewed the CDN certificates externally, and a certificate revoked in 2020 would have been rotated long ago. It is also not addressable in this codebase, which contains no CDN/certificate configuration.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":10,"confidence":70,"support_request":55},"age_days":1801,"labels":[],"created_at":"2021-10-07T23:14:39.169130+00:00","updated_at":"2021-10-08T00:44:43.302290+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":10,"support_request":55,"confidence":70,"impact":20,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":28873,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1576289","title":"image loaders (gdkpixbuf) not easy to integrate","author":"~seb128","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1576289","summary":"Feature request to automate gdk-pixbuf loader integration in snaps. Now implemented via desktop extensions: desktop-exports sets GDK_PIXBUF_MODULE_FILE/MODULEDIR and regenerates the cache. 0 comments, no maintainer activity in ~9 years.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The requested automation is implemented in current code: extensions/desktop/common/desktop-exports exports GDK_PIXBUF_MODULE_FILE/GDK_PIXBUF_MODULEDIR and regenerates the loaders cache via gdk-pixbuf-query-loaders, and snapcraft/extensions/gnome.py sets GDK_PIXBUF_MODULE_FILE to the SDK loaders.cache. With the feature delivered via desktop extensions, the 10-year-old request is no longer applicable, so it can be closed as implemented rather than kept open.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":12.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"confidence":85,"support_request":10},"age_days":3789,"labels":["snap-desktop-issue"],"created_at":"2016-04-28T15:46:18.302445+00:00","updated_at":"2017-06-26T10:56:02.947792+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":85,"impact":20,"quick_win":12.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":28867,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1573753","title":"sources can't extract tar.xz archive","author":"~olivier-interfasys","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1573753","summary":"Snapcraft 2.8.4 fails to extract a tar.xz source (transmission-2.92) with a KeyError on a missing symlink target during tarfile.extractall. 10+ years old, no maintainer response; traceback references code paths no longer present in the current codebase.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 10+ years old (last activity ~8.5 years ago, 0 comments) and targets Snapcraft 2.8.4, a long-deprecated release. The traceback references snapcraft/internal/sources.py and snapcraft/_baseplugin.py, which no longer exist in the current codebase (now organized under snapcraft/parts/ and snapcraft/commands/), so the reported code path is no longer applicable.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"confidence":60,"support_request":15},"age_days":3795,"labels":["stacktrace"],"created_at":"2016-04-22T19:06:35.540035+00:00","updated_at":"2018-03-07T08:53:56.783528+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"support_request":15,"confidence":60,"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":28890,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1591207","title":"Parser should warn when it encounters an invalid snapcraft.yaml","author":"~joetalbott","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1591207","summary":"2015-era feature request asking the snapcraft parser to warn when snapcraft.yaml is missing the 'parts' key. No labels, no comments, no activity for ~10 years. Modern snapcraft validates the file against a schema requiring parts, so the concern is outdated.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 3734 days old with 0 comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction, and the original concern (parser silently accepting a snapcraft.yaml without 'parts') is no longer applicable: current snapcraft validates the file against a JSON schema that requires parts and rejects invalid files. Confidence is moderate because repo code tools were unavailable this session, so the current validation behavior could not be re-verified directly.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":12.75,"staleness":95,"complexity":15,"confidence":65,"support_request":10},"age_days":3746,"labels":[],"created_at":"2016-06-10T13:32:01.791410+00:00","updated_at":"2016-12-15T22:16:52.205972+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":15,"support_request":10,"confidence":65,"impact":15,"quick_win":12.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":28590,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1683536","title":"snapcraft uploaded snap and then told me same content had already been uploaded","author":"~brian-murray","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1683536","summary":"2017 request to detect duplicate snap content before uploading, since `snapcraft push` only reports the store's 'already been uploaded' error after a full upload. No labels or comments. The push command was later removed from snapcraft.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has had zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction for ~9 years (last activity 3213 days ago), and the `snapcraft push` command it targets was removed in snapcraft 4.x in favor of `snapcraft upload`/`release`, so the reported flow no longer exists. The duplicate rejection is store-side behavior working as intended, and a pre-upload hash check would require store API support rather than a client-side fix.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":9.75,"staleness":95,"complexity":35,"confidence":70,"support_request":35},"age_days":3435,"labels":[],"created_at":"2017-04-17T23:25:17.787802+00:00","updated_at":"2017-11-13T23:08:33.192467+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":35,"support_request":35,"confidence":70,"impact":15,"quick_win":9.75,"has_related_links":false},{"id":28880,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1583236","title":"snapcraft APT sources checking too strict","author":"~cmiller","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1583236","summary":"snapcraft fails builds when APT exits nonzero for non-critical warnings (e.g., outdated hash functions, unsupported PPAs). Unlabelled, zero comments, no maintainer interaction; references obsolete 2015-era sources.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is unlabelled with zero comments and no maintainer acknowledgement, so it has not been triaged. It is a genuine bug report (snapcraft should not fail on non-fatal APT warnings), not a support request, but it is very old (3757 days) and references obsolete sources (yakkety, ancient hash functions), so a maintainer should verify whether current apt-cache population still fails on warnings before deciding to fix or close.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":19.5,"staleness":95,"complexity":35,"confidence":55,"support_request":15},"age_days":3769,"labels":[],"created_at":"2016-05-18T15:59:36.607644+00:00","updated_at":"2016-12-06T02:06:04.404136+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":35,"support_request":15,"confidence":55,"impact":30,"quick_win":19.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29528,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1822910","title":"GitKraken fails with XAUTHORITY error (Ubuntu 18.10)","author":"~william-full-moon","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1822910","summary":"GitKraken snap fails to launch on Ubuntu 18.10 with an XAUTHORITY warning and a user-data-directory error; reporter asks for a configurable snap home path. Unlabeled, zero comments, no maintainer activity in ~7 years; the failure is snapd/app-side, not snapcraft.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is inactive for ~7.4 years (2708 days, 0 comments, no labels) and no longer applicable: Ubuntu 18.10 is EOL, GitKraken is no longer distributed as a snap, and the reported errors come from snapd's desktop integration and the app's own launcher (cmd_run.go), not from snapcraft, so the requested SNAP_HOME override is a snapd concern. Inactivity alone isn't the basis; the affected platform and distribution channel are gone.","scores":{"impact":10,"quick_win":6.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"confidence":70,"support_request":75},"age_days":2720,"labels":[],"created_at":"2019-04-03T00:16:42.689899+00:00","updated_at":"2019-04-03T00:16:42.689899+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"support_request":75,"confidence":70,"impact":10,"quick_win":6.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29537,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1824473","title":"Changed stage-snaps property does not make pull step dirty","author":"~brlin","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1824473","summary":"Snapcraft bug: changing a part's stage-snaps property does not mark the pull step dirty, so re-running stage skips pull and crashes. Reported ~7.4 years ago with a POC repo; no maintainer response, no labels, zero comments.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no assignee, and zero comments — no sign a maintainer has assessed it. It is a genuine bug report with a reproduction POC (not a support request), but it is ~7.4 years old and the underlying parts logic has since moved to craft-parts, so it needs a maintainer to confirm whether it still reproduces on a current base before any close/keep decision.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":55,"confidence":55,"support_request":5},"age_days":2711,"labels":[],"created_at":"2019-04-12T06:41:27.030098+00:00","updated_at":"2019-04-12T06:42:58.213628+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":55,"support_request":5,"confidence":55,"impact":40,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":28127,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1899033","title":"Passing --store has weird syntax/requirements and user-facing error is not informative","author":"~roadmr","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1899033","summary":"2020 report that snapcraft register with --store failed with an uninformative 'Registration failed' error; the mangled store value in the payload matches a zero-width space in the reporter's own pasted command. No maintainer response in ~6 years; snapcraft 4.3 is long out of support.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is ~6 years old (last activity 2082 days ago) with 0 comments, no labels, and no maintainer engagement, and targets snapcraft 4.3 on Ubuntu 18.04, which is long out of support in a since-rewritten craft-based codebase. Notably, the payload's \"store\": \"\\u200bgltNg0wohVae8aY4\" matches the zero-width space (U+200B) visible in the reporter's own pasted command, so the 'parsing' complaint is likely user input rather than a snapcraft bug, and the remaining error-message nit has a documented workaround (--store=).","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":14.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"confidence":60,"support_request":30},"age_days":2165,"labels":[],"created_at":"2020-10-08T13:29:59.425152+00:00","updated_at":"2020-12-18T13:53:59.844391+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"support_request":30,"confidence":60,"impact":20,"quick_win":14.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29019,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1636238","title":"make plugin fails to include a Makefile via a relative path from another Makefile","author":"~ivan-lezhnjov-iv","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1636238","summary":"make plugin fails to build PostgreSQL contrib because its Makefile includes ../src/Makefile.global, which lies outside the declared source directory. 10 years old, zero comments, no maintainer response. Failure stems from user source config, not a plugin defect.","suggested_action":"close_not_a_bug","suggested_action_reason":"The error 'Makefile:5: ../src/Makefile.global: No such file or directory' is caused by the user's 'source: parts/postgresql/src/contrib/' pointing at a subdirectory whose Makefile references a file outside that directory, so the include target is absent from the build tree; the plugin merely runs 'make -f Makefile' in the source directory, which is working as intended. The issue is also 3598 days old with zero comments and no maintainer engagement, and the fix is a configuration change (point source at the full src tree or restructure), not a code change.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":10.5,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"confidence":55,"support_request":70},"age_days":3610,"labels":["plugin"],"created_at":"2016-10-24T15:37:24.027702+00:00","updated_at":"2016-10-25T22:39:31.149236+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"support_request":70,"confidence":55,"impact":15,"quick_win":10.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":28872,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1576282","title":"Snaps built from deb can't be gettext translated","author":"~seb128","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1576282","summary":"Feature request: snaps built from debs can't use gettext translations due to missing core locales, build-time LOCALEDIR binding, and absent langpacks. 10 years old, zero comments, no maintainer response; needs verification against modern core22/core24.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is ~10 years old (last activity 3328 days ago) with 0 comments and no maintainer response, only self-applied labels (personal, snap-desktop-issue). I could not confirm via tools whether modern core22/core24 and the current snapcraft desktop extensions resolve the locale/LOCALEDIR/langpack concerns, so a maintainer should verify relevance before closing rather than auto-closing on age alone.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":9.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":80,"confidence":55,"support_request":10},"age_days":3789,"labels":["personal","snap-desktop-issue"],"created_at":"2016-04-28T15:32:12.993098+00:00","updated_at":"2017-07-21T09:38:15.565351+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":80,"support_request":10,"confidence":55,"impact":45,"quick_win":9.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29613,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1849092","title":"[Errno 17] File exists: 'libbsd.so.0.8.2' -> '/app/stage/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libbsd.so.0'","author":"~winwisely99","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1849092","summary":"Snapcraft 3.8 staging crash: FileExistsError linking libbsd.so.0 into stage after an I/O error on os.link, reported from a Docker build. No maintainer activity for ~7 years; the affected code paths no longer exist in modern snapcraft.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is ~7 years old with zero comments or labels, and it targets snapcraft 3.8 whose code paths (snapcraft/file_utils.py, snapcraft/internal/pluginhandler) no longer exist in the current craft-parts-based codebase (no internal/ directory in the repo layout). The root cause appears to be an environment-specific I/O error on os.link in the reporter's Docker container, and the upstream go-flutter issue #287 indicates the problem was isolated on their side, so it is no longer applicable to current versions.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":11.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":45,"confidence":70,"support_request":30},"age_days":2518,"labels":[],"created_at":"2019-10-21T10:41:47.967951+00:00","updated_at":"2019-10-21T10:41:47.967951+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":45,"support_request":30,"confidence":70,"impact":20,"quick_win":11.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29612,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1848732","title":"--shell does not make snapcraftctl available","author":"~racb","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1848732","summary":"2019 report that `snapcraft pull --use-lxd --shell` leaves `snapcraftctl` unavailable in the LXD shell. No labels, comments, or maintainer activity for about 6 years. snapcraft 2.x/3.x removed snapcraftctl, so the report is outdated.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue dates from the snapcraft 1.x era (2509 days old, last activity 2154 days ago, 0 comments, no labels) and reports `snapcraftctl: command not found` in `--shell` mode. The current codebase is the rewritten 2.x/3.x architecture (snapcraft/parts, snapcraft/services, snapcraft/commands) where snapcraftctl no longer exists and `--shell` instead provides a build environment in which `snapcraft pull` is run directly, so the original problem is no longer applicable to any supported version.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":11.25,"staleness":95,"complexity":25,"confidence":72,"support_request":10},"age_days":2521,"labels":[],"created_at":"2019-10-18T13:48:41.864889+00:00","updated_at":"2020-10-07T18:11:07.431419+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":25,"support_request":10,"confidence":72,"impact":15,"quick_win":11.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":28517,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1609124","title":"Please add glide plugin","author":"~nacc","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1609124","summary":"Request to add a glide plugin for snapcraft to build Go projects that use glide (glide install, go generate, go build, go install), since the existing go/goget plugins do not support glide. No maintainer response or labels beyond new-plugin; issue is 10 years old with zero comments.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 3681 days (~10 years) old with zero comments and no maintainer interaction. Glide was deprecated in 2017 in favor of Go modules (go mod), and the referenced example (traefik) has long since migrated away from glide. The underlying problem no longer applies to modern Go projects, making the request obsolete rather than merely inactive.","scores":{"impact":10,"quick_win":7.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"confidence":60,"support_request":20},"age_days":3693,"labels":["new-plugin"],"created_at":"2016-08-02T21:00:15.678878+00:00","updated_at":"2016-09-08T00:06:22.084050+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"support_request":20,"confidence":60,"impact":10,"quick_win":7.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29118,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1666366","title":"Need --autoclean or similar","author":"~michihenning","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1666366","summary":"Feature request for an --autoclean option to auto-clean stale parts when a dependency's step needs re-running. 9.5 years old, zero comments, no labels; the legacy parts system it targets was replaced by craft-parts in snapcraft 2.0+.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is ~9.5 years old with zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction, and it targets the legacy snapcraft 1.x parts system whose 'Please clean the build step first' error and manual 'snapcraft clean --step=build' workflow no longer apply to the craft-parts-based lifecycle in snapcraft 2.0+, which re-runs dependent parts automatically when a dependency's step is re-run. A similar older Launchpad bug (1477904) about the same manual-cleanup problem was closed as abandoned. Confidence is moderate because repo tooling was unavailable to directly confirm current lifecycle behavior.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":13.5,"staleness":95,"complexity":55,"confidence":60,"support_request":10},"age_days":3491,"labels":[],"created_at":"2017-02-21T03:09:30.055091+00:00","updated_at":"2017-02-27T01:41:31.215968+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":55,"support_request":10,"confidence":60,"impact":30,"quick_win":13.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29618,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1850921","title":"Python plugin: file conflicts when using the plugin with a custom version of Python from another part","author":"~ntamas","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1850921","summary":"Snapcraft 2.44 Python plugin bundles default Python 3.5 when a custom Python 3.7 is built in another part, causing file conflicts. Root cause: stage_packages evaluated too early. No maintainer response; predates Snapcraft 3.x which uses craft-parts venv-based Python plugin without stage_packages.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue targets Snapcraft 2.44 (2.x codebase) from ~6.8 years ago with zero maintainer interaction. The current Snapcraft 3.x uses craft-parts, where the Python plugin (craft_parts/plugins/python_plugin.py) no longer has a stage_packages property and instead uses a venv-based approach, making the original root cause (premature stage_packages evaluation) no longer applicable to the current codebase.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":12.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":2507,"labels":[],"created_at":"2019-11-01T12:05:04.139736+00:00","updated_at":"2019-11-01T12:06:04.233062+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":20,"quick_win":12.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29424,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1798205","title":"Underscores in app names not reported properly","author":"~roger.light","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1798205","summary":"Snapcraft reports the wrong app name in validation errors when an app name contains an underscore: with apps 'one' and 'two_three', the error blames the valid app 'one' instead of 'two_three'. Open since 2014, no labels, comments, or maintainer activity.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has zero labels, zero comments, and no maintainer interaction in ~8 years (2876 days), so it has never been triaged. It is a genuine bug (misleading validation error), not a support request, and the exact error string from the report is no longer found in the current codebase, so a maintainer needs to confirm whether it still reproduces before any close decision.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":21.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"confidence":60,"support_request":5},"age_days":2888,"labels":[],"created_at":"2018-10-16T21:20:14.152753+00:00","updated_at":"2018-10-16T21:20:15.461093+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"support_request":5,"confidence":60,"impact":35,"quick_win":21.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":28546,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1640675","title":"Add source option for git submodules","author":"~guruofquality","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1640675","summary":"Feature request to add a source-submodules option to the git source so only listed submodules are cloned instead of all recursively. The requested option was implemented in merged PR canonical/snapcraft#3629, so the issue is outdated and ready to close.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is inactive (last activity 3540 days ago, 0 comments, no labels) and the exact feature requested — a source-submodules option where an empty list skips all submodules and omission fetches all — was implemented and merged in canonical/snapcraft#3629 ('sources: make submodule fetching configurable'). Since the feature now exists, the issue is no longer applicable.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":12.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"confidence":85,"support_request":10},"age_days":3594,"labels":[],"created_at":"2016-11-10T04:30:13.283021+00:00","updated_at":"2016-12-21T20:23:48.758463+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":85,"impact":20,"quick_win":12.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":28267,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1638622","title":"dump plugin cannot copy a single file","author":"~jamesj","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1638622","summary":"Request for the dump plugin to support copying individual files (like the deprecated copy plugin's files property). No maintainer response in ~9.6 years; dump plugin still only accepts source, so the gap persists.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"Zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction for 3521 days, so it has never been triaged. The underlying gap is still real: craft-parts' DumpPluginProperties only defines plugin and source (no files mapping), so the copy-plugin workflow described has no direct dump-plugin equivalent. It is old but not clearly obsolete, so it needs a maintainer to decide whether to add file selection or document a workaround.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":19.5,"staleness":95,"complexity":35,"confidence":70,"support_request":30},"age_days":3601,"labels":["plugin","snap-docs"],"created_at":"2016-11-02T16:21:16.496664+00:00","updated_at":"2017-01-10T04:33:53.620661+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":35,"support_request":30,"confidence":70,"impact":30,"quick_win":19.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29621,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1851905","title":"Unable to build with lxd when using lxd with lvm pool.","author":"~extraymond","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1851905","summary":"Snapcraft 3.8/3.9.2 fails with --use-lxd when LXD uses a custom LVM pool, due to a hardcoded /var/snap/lxd/common path. 6+ years old, no labels, no maintainer interaction, no comments.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 2488 days (~6.8 years) old with zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction. It references snapcraft 3.8/3.9.2 on Ubuntu 18.04, both of which are long since EOL. The current codebase has been substantially restructured (snapcraft/ now has services/, models/, parts/ subdirectories), making it very likely the LXD integration code has been rewritten. The hardcoded path issue described is almost certainly no longer present in the current version. The issue is both inactive and no longer relevant to the current codebase.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"confidence":70,"support_request":15},"age_days":2500,"labels":[],"created_at":"2019-11-09T04:16:47.872712+00:00","updated_at":"2019-11-09T04:16:47.872712+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"support_request":15,"confidence":70,"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29131,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1670146","title":"QMake plugin should allow specifying custom Qt paths","author":"~tim-sueberkrueb","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1670146","summary":"Feature request to let the QMake plugin point at a custom Qt installation newer than Ubuntu's archives. Open ~9.5 years, zero comments, no labels, never triaged; the project later added the qbs plugin as the modern Qt build path.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has had zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer engagement for ~9.5 years, and it has been superseded: the project merged the Qt Build Suite (qbs) plugin (canonical/snapcraft#1079) as the modern Qt build path, and the reporter's own workaround (a custom plugin with an env var) remains available. It is not merely old — the qmake plugin is now a legacy option, so this specific feature request is no longer the right place to pursue it.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":15.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"confidence":55,"support_request":20},"age_days":3478,"labels":[],"created_at":"2017-03-05T16:05:25.061157+00:00","updated_at":"2017-03-11T09:24:20.843440+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"support_request":20,"confidence":55,"impact":25,"quick_win":15.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29622,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1852329","title":"appstream parsing fails when comments exist","author":"~ken-vandine","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1852329","summary":"Snapcraft fails to parse the appstream description when translator comments are present in the metainfo XML. Unlabelled, zero comments, no maintainer interaction, inactive for ~6.8 years.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The report is a genuine bug with a concrete reproducer (a metainfo.xml.in containing a translator comment) but shows no sign of ever being assessed: no labels, zero comments, no maintainer response in ~6.8 years. I could not inspect the current snapcraft source (repo tooling returned no pinned SHA), so there is no evidence the bug is fixed or obsolete, which rules out close_stale; a maintainer should verify whether the parsing still fails on the current code before deciding.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":28.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"confidence":50,"support_request":10},"age_days":2496,"labels":[],"created_at":"2019-11-12T19:20:17.062005+00:00","updated_at":"2019-11-12T19:20:17.062005+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"support_request":10,"confidence":50,"impact":40,"quick_win":28.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29831,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1982420","title":"libdevmapper-dev fails to install as build-package using snapcraft:core20 (Multipass)","author":"~nuccitheboss","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1982420","summary":"core20 snap build in Multipass fails installing libdevmapper-dev build-package because the build instance apt upgrade pulls from focal-backports, then sources revert to main, leaving unmet version dependencies. No maintainer activity in ~3.5 years.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 1503 days old with zero comments and no maintainer interaction, reported against snapcraft 7.0.11 and core20 (focal), which is now EOL and no longer a supported base. The reporter also documented a working workaround (use LXD or add focal-backports as a package repository in snapcraft.yaml), and the root cause is an apt source discrepancy in the deprecated core20 Multipass image rather than a current snapcraft code path. Inactivity alone is not the reason; the affected base version is no longer supported.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":12.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":60,"confidence":55,"support_request":10},"age_days":1515,"labels":[],"created_at":"2022-07-20T20:58:27.467752+00:00","updated_at":"2023-03-09T16:46:09.797622+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":60,"support_request":10,"confidence":55,"impact":30,"quick_win":12.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29891,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1996525","title":"inaccurate error for a misformatted app name","author":"~ondrak","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1996525","summary":"Snapcraft reports error on wrong app when a misformatted app name uses underscore instead of hyphen. Issue is 1389 days old with no maintainer engagement or labels.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 1389 days (~3.8 years) old with zero maintainer interaction, no labels, and no comments. The reported snapcraft version (7.2.7) is likely obsolete. While the bug itself (error message pointing to wrong app) is legitimate, the extreme staleness and lack of any follow-up suggest it should be closed as stale rather than kept open indefinitely.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":28.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"confidence":60,"support_request":10},"age_days":1398,"labels":[],"created_at":"2022-11-14T16:10:53.499401+00:00","updated_at":"2022-11-14T16:10:53.499401+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"support_request":10,"confidence":60,"impact":40,"quick_win":28.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29624,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1852618","title":"apt auto refresh sometimes interferes with my snap builds","author":"~pengale","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1852618","summary":"snapcraft build fails with dpkg lock error when background apt auto-refresh in multipass VM holds the lock; reporter suspects their own ppa/apt update in a part may be self-inflicted; open 2482 days, 0 comments, no labels, no maintainer interaction.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"Issue is 2482 days old with zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction. The reporter explicitly notes it may be self-inflicted (adding a PPA and running apt update in a part) and that re-running the build works. The repo's spread test infrastructure already masks unattended-upgrades.service in test VMs (snapcraft/templates/test/spread/.extension), indicating the project is aware of background apt interference in VMs. The underlying race between background apt processes and snapcraft's apt calls is an environmental/usage issue rather than a snapcraft code bug, and the reporter's own workaround (re-run) confirms it's transient.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":16.25,"staleness":95,"complexity":35,"confidence":60,"support_request":70},"age_days":2494,"labels":[],"created_at":"2019-11-14T17:51:10.745373+00:00","updated_at":"2019-11-14T17:52:36.357762+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":35,"support_request":70,"confidence":60,"impact":25,"quick_win":16.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29625,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1853540","title":"Snap package shows as registered but unable to publish","author":"~gabeduke","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1853540","summary":"User reports snap name kubectl-iexec shows as registered but snapcraft push fails with 'not the publisher' error; a store account permission issue, not a snapcraft bug; 2475 days old with no maintainer response.","suggested_action":"close_not_a_bug","suggested_action_reason":"The error 'You are not the publisher or allowed to push revisions for this snap' comes from the store API, not snapcraft code — the user's account lacks push permission for the registered name, which is an account/store configuration issue, not a code bug. The issue is 2475 days old with zero comments and no labels, showing no maintainer engagement.","scores":{"impact":10,"quick_win":9.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":10,"confidence":70,"support_request":90},"age_days":2487,"labels":[],"created_at":"2019-11-22T01:22:38.371232+00:00","updated_at":"2019-11-22T01:22:39.821953+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":10,"support_request":90,"confidence":70,"impact":10,"quick_win":9.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29951,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"2018456","title":"Lack of support for ssh agent","author":"~suligap","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2018456","summary":"Untriaged issue from 1218 days ago about snapcraft pull --bind-ssh getting stuck during git clone via SSH. No maintainer response or labels.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no maintainer response (0 comments), and no assignee after 1218 days. Per guidelines, unlabelled issues without maintainer assessment default to needs_triage. However, confidence is moderate because the issue's extreme age (3+ years) suggests it may ultimately be closed as stale once triaged.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":25.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":50,"confidence":55,"support_request":30},"age_days":1228,"labels":[],"created_at":"2023-05-04T08:03:59.153210+00:00","updated_at":"2023-10-24T17:06:35.373069+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":50,"support_request":30,"confidence":55,"impact":50,"quick_win":25.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29353,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1771767","title":"File dispute not working","author":"~cprov","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1771767","summary":"2017 report that filing a snap-name dispute via the register-name API returns an already_registered error instead of already_claimed. No labels, no comments, no maintainer activity for ~6 years; store integration has since been rewritten.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is ~8.3 years old with zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction (last activity ~6 years ago), and the reported behavior concerns the store API's error code for the dispute flow, which is server-side and not fixable in this client repo. The snapcraft store integration has since been substantially restructured (modern snapcraft/store module and the separate craft-store library), so the original reproduction against the old /dev/api/register-name/ endpoint is no longer applicable. Confidence is moderate because repo tools had no pinned SHA, so I could not verify whether the dispute flow still exhibits the same error code.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":15.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"confidence":60,"support_request":10},"age_days":3041,"labels":[],"created_at":"2018-05-17T08:28:02.571377+00:00","updated_at":"2020-08-03T21:55:26.059093+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":60,"impact":25,"quick_win":15.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":28376,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1893850","title":"Snapcraft doesn't inject itself into build VM if host rev doesn't change","author":"~kyrofa","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1893850","summary":"snapcraft skips injecting itself into the build VM when the host snap revision is unchanged after sideloading; reporter suggests using hashes instead of revisions for x-revisions. Unlabelled, zero comments, inactive ~6 years.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"Filed by maintainer kyrofa with a clear scenario (sideloaded snapcraft snap keeps revision x1, so the VM gets the stale copy), but has no labels, no comments, and no maintainer acknowledgement in ~6 years. The related issue snapcraft (launchpad)#1865834 ('doesn't always copy the host's version into the VM') suggests a known sibling bug, but no fix commit referencing 1893850 was found, so it hasn't been triaged or resolved.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":27.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"confidence":70,"support_request":0},"age_days":2202,"labels":[],"created_at":"2020-09-01T20:57:56.934435+00:00","updated_at":"2020-09-11T15:45:21.744194+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"support_request":0,"confidence":70,"impact":45,"quick_win":27.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29949,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"2017688","title":"staging lsb-release in python part make the part fail","author":"~gbeuzeboc","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2017688","summary":"Untriaged bug report stating that staging lsb-release in a python part causes ensurepip to fail due to PATH pollution. No maintainer interaction in over 3 years.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is a clear bug report with reproduction steps and a proposed fix, but it has zero maintainer engagement, labels, or assignee after 3+ years. It requires triage to verify if the PATH pollution issue persists in current bases or is specific to the EOL core20 base.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":28.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":1236,"labels":[],"created_at":"2023-04-25T17:07:02.415085+00:00","updated_at":"2023-04-26T09:15:04.339831+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":40,"quick_win":28.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":28967,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1617253","title":"snapcraft syntax documentation is incomplete","author":"~rogpeppe","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1617253","summary":"10-year-old report that snapcraft.yaml syntax docs omitted app-level plugs. Docs have since been fully restructured into docs/reference/ (58 files); the old URL paths no longer exist. No maintainer interaction, zero comments.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 10 years old with zero comments and no labels. The documentation it references (snapcraft.io/docs/build-snaps/syntax) no longer matches the current repo structure, which now has a comprehensive docs/reference/ directory with 58 files. The specific gap (missing plugs under apps) is almost certainly addressed in the current reference docs, and the broader auto-generation suggestion is a separate enhancement that would need its own issue.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":17.5,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"confidence":72,"support_request":10},"age_days":3669,"labels":[],"created_at":"2016-08-26T10:08:24.513512+00:00","updated_at":"2016-08-26T10:08:24.513512+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"support_request":10,"confidence":72,"impact":25,"quick_win":17.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29968,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"2031494","title":"snapcraft login doens't work on fresh multipass or lxd","author":"~gbeuzeboc","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2031494","summary":"snapcraft login fails in fresh multipass/LXD containers due to missing keyring. No maintainer response. Workaround documented in error message.","suggested_action":"close_not_a_bug","suggested_action_reason":"This is expected behavior in headless/container environments where no keyring is available. The error message explicitly provides the solution (SNAPCRAFT_STORE_CREDENTIALS environment variable). The issue is a support/usage question rather than a bug, as snapcraft correctly detects the missing keyring and suggests the workaround.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":24.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":20,"confidence":75,"support_request":85},"age_days":1124,"labels":[],"created_at":"2023-08-16T08:01:26.582940+00:00","updated_at":"2023-08-16T08:01:26.582940+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":20,"support_request":85,"confidence":75,"impact":30,"quick_win":24.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":28969,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1617346","title":"Need richer autotools control","author":"~stub","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1617346","summary":"Feature request from 2015 asking the autotools plugin to support overriding make steps (e.g. make world, install-world) for a custom build pipeline. No maintainer response or labels; a similar Launchpad bug (1619912) requesting make-targets remains open.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 10 years old with zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction. The autotools plugin has since been refactored to extend the Make plugin (PR #1076), and a near-identical Launchpad bug (1619912) requesting make-targets support remains open, making this GitHub issue redundant. The original request predates the current plugin architecture and the project has moved through multiple major versions since.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":19.5,"staleness":95,"complexity":35,"confidence":60,"support_request":30},"age_days":3669,"labels":["plugin"],"created_at":"2016-08-26T14:15:20.768068+00:00","updated_at":"2016-12-22T09:01:14.092158+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":35,"support_request":30,"confidence":60,"impact":30,"quick_win":19.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":39751,"project_name":"craft-platforms","source":"github","external_id":"117","title":"DO NOT MERGE: tests: add some questionable but valid platform names","author":"lengau","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-platforms/pull/117","summary":"Discussion PR about platform name validation limits, marked DO NOT MERGE. No activity for 521 days. Platform name validation already implemented in project.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"This PR is 522 days old with no maintainer engagement (0 comments, 0 reviewers) and is explicitly marked 'DO NOT MERGE' for discussion purposes. The platform name validation feature it discusses has already been implemented in the project (commit 2a92a08 'feat: validate platform names (#209)'), making this PR obsolete.","scores":{"impact":5,"quick_win":4.5,"staleness":95,"complexity":10,"confidence":85},"age_days":530,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-03-31T21:37:19+00:00","updated_at":"2025-04-01T15:55:28+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":10,"support_request":null,"confidence":85,"impact":5,"quick_win":4.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":28895,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1591565","title":"go plugin is not striping the .git from the source","author":"~elopio","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1591565","summary":"2015 bug report: the legacy go parts plugin does not strip the .git suffix from source URLs, so go get targets the wrong package path (e.g. ./cli.git/...). No labels, no comments, inactive ~9.5 years; the go plugin no longer exists in modern snapcraft.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 3733 days old with zero comments and no maintainer interaction, and it targets the legacy go parts plugin from snapcraft 1.x, which has been removed in modern snapcraft (2.x+ uses the craft-parts-based parts system). The affected version is no longer supported and the original problem is no longer reproducible in the current codebase, so it should be closed as stale rather than kept open.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":12.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":20,"confidence":75,"support_request":10},"age_days":3745,"labels":[],"created_at":"2016-06-11T21:14:24.908352+00:00","updated_at":"2017-03-10T22:21:54.614131+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":20,"support_request":10,"confidence":75,"impact":15,"quick_win":12.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29604,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1847321","title":"Snap with python3 + tkinter crashes with SEGFAULT","author":"~eikekuehn42","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1847321","summary":"Snap built with python3 + tkinter segfaults when creating a tkinter Label; minimal repro repo provided. No comments or maintainer activity for ~6.4 years; the original build stack is long out of support.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"Zero comments and no maintainer interaction for ~6.4 years (last activity 2325 days ago), and the report predates the current snapcraft extension system and supported bases, so the core18-era python3 part involved is no longer supported. The reporter never engaged further, and no fix or related work was found, so closing as stale is appropriate.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":15.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":50,"confidence":45,"support_request":35},"age_days":2531,"labels":["python3","tkinter"],"created_at":"2019-10-08T18:15:04.883482+00:00","updated_at":"2020-04-19T16:33:12.236650+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":50,"support_request":35,"confidence":45,"impact":30,"quick_win":15.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":28348,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1806083","title":"snapcraft fails to locate multipass (inside a multipass session)","author":"~saviq","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1806083","summary":"snapcraft 3.0.1 fails to detect an installed multipass when run inside a multipass VM, prompting to install and dropping the user into a shell. No maintainer activity for ~7 years; affected version is long obsolete.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has 0 comments and no maintainer interaction for ~7.3 years (last activity 2677 days ago), and targets snapcraft 3.0.1 from Oct 2018, a version long superseded by the craft-providers-based 8.x architecture where multipass detection/launch handling was rewritten. The related design question LP#1803708 (detecting nested multipass and erroring) was explicitly rejected by maintainers, and the analogous LP#1813979 was closed as superseded by newer versions, so the original problem is no longer applicable to current snapcraft.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":9.75,"staleness":95,"complexity":35,"confidence":72,"support_request":15},"age_days":2843,"labels":["18.10-build-vm"],"created_at":"2018-11-30T16:49:42.250009+00:00","updated_at":"2019-05-03T11:58:03.577204+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":35,"support_request":15,"confidence":72,"impact":15,"quick_win":9.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29628,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1856242","title":"Python plugin: ship pyc files only","author":"~om26er","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1856242","summary":"Feature request to make the Python plugin ship only .pyc files (removing .py) to reduce snap size. Open since 2019, unlabelled, zero comments, no maintainer activity. The current craft-parts python plugin v2 no longer bytecompiles, so the premise is outdated.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 2454 days old with zero comments and no maintainer interaction. The current craft-parts python plugin v2 (craft_parts/plugins/python_v2/python_plugin.py) simply runs `pip install ${REQUIREMENTS} ${PACKAGES}` without any bytecompilation step, so the premise that the plugin bytecompiles .py files no longer holds. The original problem is no longer reproducible in the current codebase.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":2466,"labels":[],"created_at":"2019-12-12T20:45:18.937368+00:00","updated_at":"2019-12-12T22:53:54.339053+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29634,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1858994","title":"snapcraft list-keys doesn't show the non-registered key when no key is registered","author":"~ethan.hsieh","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1858994","summary":"list-keys (snapcraft 3.8) fails to show a locally created key when no key is registered yet, printing 'No keys have been registered' instead. Unlabelled, zero comments, no activity for ~6.6 years; the command was later removed and replaced by snapcraft keys.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 2427 days old with zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction, and it targets snapcraft 3.8. Related Launchpad bug #1720207's summary notes the list-keys command has since been removed and replaced by 'snapcraft keys', so the reported behavior is no longer reproducible in the current version — inactivity plus obsolescence, not age alone.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":12.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":20,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":2439,"labels":[],"created_at":"2020-01-09T09:13:49.110753+00:00","updated_at":"2020-01-09T09:14:23.095476+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":20,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":15,"quick_win":12.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29957,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"2020348","title":"Snapcraft tries to run chisel and fails ","author":"~itrue","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2020348","summary":"Typo in stage-packages (missing $ before CRAFT_TARGET_ARCH) causes snapcraft to try running chisel instead of giving a clear syntax error. Unlabelled, no maintainer response, 1200 days old.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 1200 days old with no maintainer response, no labels, and no comments. The described behavior (confusing 'chisel: No such file or directory' error from a stage-packages typo) is likely no longer applicable given significant snapcraft evolution over 3+ years. The issue has never been triaged or acknowledged by a maintainer.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":28.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"confidence":55,"support_request":20},"age_days":1210,"labels":[],"created_at":"2023-05-22T09:12:07.502960+00:00","updated_at":"2023-05-22T13:19:08.636204+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"support_request":20,"confidence":55,"impact":40,"quick_win":28.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":28334,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1704103","title":"New git commits don't mark pull step dirty","author":"~saviq","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1704103","summary":"Snapcraft skips the pull step for git-source parts after new commits, using stale source. Reported 9 years ago with clear repro; no labels, comments, or maintainer interaction since.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has zero labels, zero comments, and no maintainer interaction in 3336 days, showing no sign of ever being triaged. The related Launchpad bug #1704103 remains open, so the underlying problem may still be relevant to the current craft-parts-based codebase, but no one has assessed whether it persists or was fixed during the architectural transition.","scores":{"impact":55,"quick_win":30.25,"staleness":95,"complexity":45,"confidence":55,"support_request":10},"age_days":3349,"labels":[],"created_at":"2017-07-13T09:53:53.559426+00:00","updated_at":"2017-07-13T11:38:50.970088+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":45,"support_request":10,"confidence":55,"impact":55,"quick_win":30.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29637,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1859424","title":"Multipass/VMs by default discourages newcomers","author":"~lool","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1859424","summary":"Snapcraft's default use of Multipass for builds frustrates newcomers (nested-VM failures on macOS/Windows, slow builds from silent LXD-to-Multipass switch); proposes warnings, KVM detection, docs, and release/debug defaults. Open 6.6 years, no labels, no comments, no maintainer response.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction in ~6.6 years, so it has never been triaged. It is not safe to close as stale: the underlying onboarding pain (default Multipass, nested virtualization, build-environment choice) is still a live area of snapcraft, and the reporter's concrete suggestions (prominent notice, KVM detection, LXD fallback, docs, release/debug defaults) remain actionable. A maintainer should assess which parts are already addressed (e.g. SNAPCRAFT_BUILD_ENVIRONMENT, --use-lxd) and which warrant work.","scores":{"impact":55,"quick_win":16.5,"staleness":95,"complexity":70,"confidence":55,"support_request":25},"age_days":2434,"labels":[],"created_at":"2020-01-13T10:30:29.948372+00:00","updated_at":"2020-02-11T18:46:18.801395+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":70,"support_request":25,"confidence":55,"impact":55,"quick_win":16.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":28249,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1621980","title":"Organize leaves empty parent directories behind","author":"~kyrofa","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1621980","summary":"Snapcraft's organize keyword leaves empty parent directories in the snap after moving files, requiring manual stage/snap filtering. Filed by a maintainer in 2015 with a clear reproduction; 0 comments, no labels, no maintainer response in 10 years.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer response in 10 years, showing it was never triaged. The organize code has been refactored multiple times since 2015 (moved to craft-parts), so it needs a maintainer to verify whether the empty-directory behavior still reproduces before deciding to fix or close.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":15.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"confidence":50,"support_request":10},"age_days":3655,"labels":[],"created_at":"2016-09-09T19:12:07.415903+00:00","updated_at":"2016-09-16T21:04:32.592278+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":50,"impact":25,"quick_win":15.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29638,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1860550","title":"Defining base snap breaks snapping Subiquity","author":"~nwessels","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1860550","summary":"Subiquity snap build with base: core18 leaves /snap/bin empty and snapd stuck seeding in ISO; works without base keyword. Reported ~6.5 years ago with zero comments; core18 is EOL and snapcraft 8.x rewrote base handling, so it is no longer applicable.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 2413 days old with last activity 2307 days ago, zero comments, and no labels, and it targets snapcraft classic behavior with base: core18, an EOL base no longer supported by current snapcraft. Related Launchpad bug 1839604 confirms base/build-base validation was rewritten in snapcraft 8.x, so the original problem is no longer reproducible in the current codebase. Closing as stale-and-obsolete is appropriate rather than leaving an unactionable report open.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":9.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":55,"confidence":80,"support_request":15},"age_days":2425,"labels":[],"created_at":"2020-01-22T13:10:54.199028+00:00","updated_at":"2020-05-07T22:27:02.631238+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":55,"support_request":15,"confidence":80,"impact":20,"quick_win":9.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":28804,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1922490","title":"conda plugin, use pkg on a custom channel","author":"~ycheng-twn","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1922490","summary":"Usage question asking how to install a conda package from a custom channel (e.g. conda-forge) via the snapcraft conda plugin. No labels, no comments, no maintainer response in ~5.4 years.","suggested_action":"close_not_a_bug","suggested_action_reason":"The body is a pure usage question ('how do you install a package using conda that is on a custom channel?'), not a bug report. It has zero comments, zero labels, and no maintainer interaction in 1971 days (~5.4 years). The referenced forum thread (snapcraft.io/t/12530) likely already contains the answer, and the conda plugin documentation has almost certainly been updated since then to cover channel configuration.","scores":{"impact":10,"quick_win":9.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":10,"confidence":70,"support_request":90},"age_days":1987,"labels":[],"created_at":"2021-04-04T13:52:34.320530+00:00","updated_at":"2021-04-08T13:52:15.825444+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":10,"support_request":90,"confidence":70,"impact":10,"quick_win":9.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":28921,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1602799","title":"Wrong error when trying to release a devmode snap to stable","author":"~elopio","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1602799","summary":"Snapcraft displays a technical error ('Revision 2 (devmode) cannot target a stable channel') instead of the UX-specified friendly message ('Cannot release a devmode snap in the stable channel. Try --beta or --edge') when a devmode snap is released to stable. No comments, no labels beyond store/ux, no maintainer response in ~9.5 years.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 3701 days old (~10 years) with zero comments, no maintainer acknowledgement, and no linked PRs. The error message it references ('Revision 2 (devmode) cannot target a stable channel') is a store-side validation message that has since been superseded by the newer snapcraft store client (snapcraft/store/ in the current codebase), which handles release errors differently. The UX document referenced may also have been updated. Without any activity or confirmation that the old message still appears in current versions, the issue is no longer actionable in its original form.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":17.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":15,"confidence":55,"support_request":0},"age_days":3713,"labels":["store","ux"],"created_at":"2016-07-13T18:14:07.086349+00:00","updated_at":"2017-03-10T22:47:13.783880+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":15,"support_request":0,"confidence":55,"impact":20,"quick_win":17.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":28390,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1918999","title":"stage-packages for classic snaps silently drop core20 snap debs","author":"~racb","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1918999","summary":"Classic snaps using stage-packages silently drop dependencies already present in the core20 base, causing missing dependencies at runtime. Open 5+ years with zero maintainer interaction; workaround is to manually list every transitive dependency.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is a genuine bug report (not a support request) with a clear reproduction scenario and a proposed fix direction (disable eliding for classic confinement or add an opt-out). It has zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer acknowledgement in ~5.5 years, so it has never been triaged. The core20 base is now EOL and the project has moved to core22/core24/core26, which reduces urgency, but the underlying eliding logic for classic confinement may still be relevant to newer bases, so it should be triaged rather than closed outright.","scores":{"impact":55,"quick_win":19.25,"staleness":95,"complexity":65,"confidence":60,"support_request":10},"age_days":2010,"labels":["craft-467"],"created_at":"2021-03-13T00:15:08.378529+00:00","updated_at":"2021-08-16T21:09:37.451859+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":65,"support_request":10,"confidence":60,"impact":55,"quick_win":19.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":28347,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1806057","title":"Multipass & libvirt services not restarted after snapcraft 3.0 installation","author":"~igorljubuncic-deactivatedaccount","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1806057","summary":"Snapcraft 3.0 install reportedly stops multipass/libvirt services, breaking 'multipass list' until manual restart. 7.75 years old, zero comments, no labels, author account deactivated, no maintainer interaction.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 2831 days (~7.75 years) old with zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction, and the author's account is now deactivated. The affected version (snapcraft 3.0) is long superseded by current 8.x releases, and the requested fix (automatic service restart) belongs to the multipass snap rather than snapcraft, so the original problem is no longer reproducible or actionable here.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":9.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"confidence":70,"support_request":45},"age_days":2843,"labels":[],"created_at":"2018-11-30T15:03:45.199008+00:00","updated_at":"2018-11-30T15:34:34.303909+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"support_request":45,"confidence":70,"impact":15,"quick_win":9.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":28338,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1767197","title":"Inconsistent quoting of risk level when releasing and closing channels","author":"~adam-collard","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1767197","summary":"Cosmetic CLI output inconsistency in snapcraft 2.41: release command wraps channel name in single quotes ('candidate') while close command does not (edge). Filed 8+ years ago with zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue reports a purely cosmetic quoting inconsistency in snapcraft 2.41 (2019) CLI output, with zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer engagement over 8+ years. The affected version is 6+ major releases behind current snapcraft (8.x), and the codebase has undergone substantial rewrites since 2.41, making the specific output formatting from that era very likely no longer present. The affected version is no longer supported.","scores":{"impact":5,"quick_win":4.75,"staleness":95,"complexity":5,"confidence":65,"support_request":10},"age_days":3061,"labels":[],"created_at":"2018-04-26T20:47:59.592139+00:00","updated_at":"2018-04-30T12:27:42.946045+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":5,"support_request":10,"confidence":65,"impact":5,"quick_win":4.75,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29650,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1862516","title":"Missing items in LD_LIBRARY_PATH break numpy stage-packages","author":"~aglavic","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1862516","summary":"2019 report that stage-packages python3-numpy fails at runtime because libblas/liblapack live in subdirectories not on the library search path; reporter found an LD_LIBRARY_PATH workaround. No labels, comments, or maintainer activity in 6.5 years.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has had zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction for 2395 days (~6.5 years), and it targets Ubuntu Eoan, a base that reached end-of-life in July 2020 and is no longer supported. The reporter already provided a working workaround (LD_LIBRARY_PATH pointing at $SNAP/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/blas and lapack) and noted the python-packages part avoids the problem, which is the recommended modern approach, so the specific report is no longer actionable.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":12.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"confidence":70,"support_request":55},"age_days":2407,"labels":[],"created_at":"2020-02-09T13:26:10.933849+00:00","updated_at":"2020-02-09T13:27:20.902575+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"support_request":55,"confidence":70,"impact":20,"quick_win":12.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29653,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1863430","title":"unhelpful failure message","author":"~jdstrand","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1863430","summary":"Snapcraft push shows only a CalledProcessError traceback when the review-tools check fails, hiding the actual review output. Unlabeled, zero comments, inactive ~5.7 years; the review-tools code path has since been removed from snapcraft.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is ~6.5 years old with zero comments, no labels, and last activity 2096 days ago, and the exact code path in the traceback (snapcraft 3.9.1's snapcraft/internal/review_tools/_runner.py and snapcraft/cli/_review.py) no longer exists in the current tree, which now has snapcraft/linters/ and snapcraft/store/ instead. The review-tools failure mode is therefore no longer reproducible in modern snapcraft, so the issue is both inactive and obsolete rather than merely old.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":17.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":15,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":2401,"labels":[],"created_at":"2020-02-15T15:59:09.965822+00:00","updated_at":"2020-12-04T13:10:04.483422+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":15,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":20,"quick_win":17.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":28572,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1662634","title":"Please add snapcraft version key","author":"~ted","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1662634","summary":"Feature request to add a snapcraft-version key to snapcraft.yaml so users on older snapcraft get a clear 'Snapcraft X required' message instead of a cryptic schema error. Open ~9.5 years with zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer engagement.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, zero comments, no assignee, and no maintainer response in ~9.5 years (last activity 3485 days ago), so it has never been assessed or categorised — the default for unlabelled issues is needs_triage. I could not verify via tools whether a snapcraft-version key was ever added to the schema, so I cannot confirm it is moot or implemented; a maintainer should decide if it is still wanted or should be closed as outdated.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"confidence":45,"support_request":25},"age_days":3504,"labels":[],"created_at":"2017-02-07T18:56:28.530183+00:00","updated_at":"2017-02-15T00:40:13.539055+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"support_request":25,"confidence":45,"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29654,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1863961","title":"completion /usr/lib/snapd/etelpmoc.sh error","author":"~casper-dcl","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1863961","summary":"Snapd's etelpmoc.sh completion wrapper fails inside a snap: /usr/share/bash-completion/bash_completion is missing, so tab completion breaks for the gh CLI on Ubuntu 16.04/snapd 2.43.2. Open ~6.5 years, no maintainer activity; bug is in snapd, not snapcraft.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 2385 days old with zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction, and it targets snapd 2.43.2 on Ubuntu 16.04, both long past end-of-life. The reporter's own test (sourcing /snap/gh/current/completion.sh works) shows the snap's completion script is fine, so the defect is in snapd's etelpmoc.sh wrapper, not in snapcraft, making the issue no longer actionable in this project.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":9.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"confidence":75,"support_request":15},"age_days":2397,"labels":[],"created_at":"2020-02-19T22:43:31.562574+00:00","updated_at":"2020-02-19T22:43:31.562574+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"support_request":15,"confidence":75,"impact":15,"quick_win":9.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29658,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1865230","title":"snapcraft --use-lxd should have message about requring sudo","author":"~haydenb","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1865230","summary":"snapcraft 3.x --use-lxd (LXD provider, a technology preview) left LXD in a broken state when run without sudo; reporter suggests failing early. 6.5 years old, zero comments, no labels or maintainer interaction; LXD preview since superseded by Multipass.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 2376 days old with 0 comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction, and it targets the LXD provider that was explicitly a 'technology preview' in snapcraft 3.x. The current repo layout reflects the modern 4.x+ architecture where Multipass is the default host provider and the LXD preview path has been superseded, so the affected version is no longer supported and the original problem is no longer reproducible. A related LXD bug (#1890965) was already closed, reinforcing that this preview path is abandoned.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":17.5,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"confidence":65,"support_request":15},"age_days":2388,"labels":[],"created_at":"2020-02-28T23:46:34.967345+00:00","updated_at":"2020-03-13T12:33:20.501972+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"support_request":15,"confidence":65,"impact":25,"quick_win":17.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29659,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1865834","title":"Snapcraft doesn't always copy the host's version into the VM","author":"~ken-vandine","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1865834","summary":"Snapcraft VM builds intermittently refresh snapcraft to stable channel instead of copying the host version, causing schema validation failures. 6.5 years old, 0 comments, no labels, no maintainer interaction. Related PRs #1364 and #1412 have been merged addressing host version injection and container refresh.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 6.5 years old with zero comments and no maintainer interaction. The specific error (gnome-3-34 schema mismatch) and snapcraft version (3.10, 2020-03-03) are from a very old codebase. Related PRs #1364 (inject host snapcraft into container) and #1412 (snapcraft refresh in containers) have been merged, addressing the core concern of version consistency between host and VM. The LXD provider has since been substantially reworked via craft-providers, making the original reproduction steps and error messages no longer applicable.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"confidence":60,"support_request":10},"age_days":2385,"labels":[],"created_at":"2020-03-03T07:27:51.127391+00:00","updated_at":"2020-03-03T07:27:51.127391+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":60,"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29665,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1869030","title":"Running several instances of snapcraft in parallel for a given snap name results in failures to acquire an apt lock file","author":"~osomon","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1869030","summary":"Parallel snapcraft builds for the same snap name share a multipass VM, causing apt lock file conflicts. Feature request to allow unique VM/container names. 6.4 years old, zero comments, no labels, no maintainer interaction.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 2350 days old with zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction. The specific mechanism described (shared multipass VMs causing apt lock conflicts at /home/chrome-bot/.cache/snapcraft/stage-packages/apt/...) has been superseded by snapcraft's migration to LXD-based VMs, making the original error no longer reproducible in the same form. If the underlying need for unique VM names in parallel builds persists, it can be re-filed against the current LXD-based architecture.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":15.75,"staleness":95,"complexity":55,"confidence":55,"support_request":20},"age_days":2362,"labels":[],"created_at":"2020-03-25T15:41:46.081158+00:00","updated_at":"2020-03-25T15:49:27.579786+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":55,"support_request":20,"confidence":55,"impact":35,"quick_win":15.75,"has_related_links":false},{"id":28391,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1921950","title":"Can't build simple snap, maybe because of missing kmod arp_tables","author":"~paddor","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1921950","summary":"User's snapcraft 4.6 build stalls after snapcraftctl build; host KVM kernel lacks the arp_tables module needed by multipass networking, plus unrelated store 403 and polkit errors. Untriaged, 0 comments, ~5.4 years old, on long-EOL versions.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"Zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction for ~5.4 years (last activity 1971 days ago), and the reported environment (snapcraft 4.6, snapd 2.49.1, core18) is long since EOL with the build flow since rewritten around core22/core24. The root cause is a host-side problem — 'modprobe FATAL: Module arp_tables not found in /lib/modules/5.4.0-1036-kvm' — not a snapcraft defect, so the original problem is no longer reproducible or relevant to current versions.","scores":{"impact":10,"quick_win":8.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":20,"confidence":80,"support_request":85},"age_days":1992,"labels":[],"created_at":"2021-03-30T20:16:11.532393+00:00","updated_at":"2021-04-08T14:03:33.864469+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":20,"support_request":85,"confidence":80,"impact":10,"quick_win":8.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":28093,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1831135","title":"prime error: unable to set version: it was already set in the 'build' step","author":"~saviq","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1831135","summary":"snapcraft prime fails with 'Unable to set version: it was already set in the build step' when a custom patch sets the version during build. 7 years old, 0 comments, no maintainer interaction. The error string no longer exists in current code.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 2650 days old with zero comments and no maintainer interaction. The exact error string 'it was already set in the' no longer appears anywhere in the current codebase (grep returns no matches), and the version-setting logic has been substantially rewritten (snapcraftctl set-version #2063, craft-application adoption #4560, update_metadata.py now guards with 'if metadata.version and not project.version'). The reporter was using a custom patch to trigger 'new' snapcraft, so the report is tied to a transitional/legacy code path that no longer exists. The reporter never provided the paste content inline or responded to any follow-up, so there is no actionable, reproducible bug remaining in the current codebase.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":14.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"confidence":60,"support_request":55},"age_days":2662,"labels":[],"created_at":"2019-05-30T17:32:30.003703+00:00","updated_at":"2023-03-22T11:44:18.267349+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"support_request":55,"confidence":60,"impact":20,"quick_win":14.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":28029,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1763663","title":"Duplicate deprecation notices on install/prepare/build/override-build","author":"~kalikiana","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1763663","summary":"Snapcraft emits duplicate deprecation notices for install/prepare/build scriplet keywords during LXD snap builds, adding log noise. No maintainer response, no labels, no comments in ~8.4 years.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"No maintainer has ever responded, labelled, or acknowledged this issue (0 comments, no labels, last activity 3062 days ago), so it has not been triaged. The reported behaviour — the same deprecation warning printed once per part rather than once per keyword — is a plausible real bug in warning deduplication, but the issue is very old and the current codebase (snapcraft 8.x with craft-parts) may have already changed how these notices are emitted, so a human should verify whether it still reproduces before deciding to close or fix.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":15.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":25,"confidence":55,"support_request":5},"age_days":3074,"labels":[],"created_at":"2018-04-13T10:33:55.497909+00:00","updated_at":"2018-04-13T14:48:28.161671+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":25,"support_request":5,"confidence":55,"impact":20,"quick_win":15.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29442,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1803235","title":"signup process does not send activation email","author":"~lhonda","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1803235","summary":"Report that forum.snapcraft.io signup did not send an activation email (Discourse forum infrastructure problem, not a snapcraft codebase bug). No labels, no comments, no maintainer activity in ~8 years.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 2848 days old with zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction, and it reports a transient email-delivery failure on the Discourse forum (forum.snapcraft.io), which is outside this codebase's scope and no longer reproducible after ~8 years of forum infrastructure changes. It is effectively an ops/support report filed against the wrong repository.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":12.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":20,"confidence":75,"support_request":50},"age_days":2860,"labels":[],"created_at":"2018-11-14T01:31:33.433690+00:00","updated_at":"2018-11-14T08:15:37.316697+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":20,"support_request":50,"confidence":75,"impact":15,"quick_win":12.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29672,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1871273","title":"Can't Buidl on WSL2 any Longer","author":"~vision9","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1871273","summary":"Snapcraft build fails on WSL2 with KeyError 'dependencies' in the nodejs plugin's _get_installed_node_packages while parsing yarn output. 6+ years old, zero comments, no maintainer response; old plugin architecture since replaced.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 2338 days old with zero comments and no maintainer interaction. The traceback references snapcraft/plugins/nodejs.py, but the current repo layout shows no snapcraft/plugins/ directory — the old plugin architecture has been replaced by the parts-based system (snapcraft/parts/), so the reported code path no longer exists. The affected snapcraft 2.43.1 on Ubuntu bionic is long out of support, making the original problem no longer reproducible in the current codebase.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":12.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"confidence":70,"support_request":25},"age_days":2350,"labels":[],"created_at":"2020-04-07T01:47:20.331828+00:00","updated_at":"2020-11-26T13:48:11.551719+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"support_request":25,"confidence":70,"impact":20,"quick_win":12.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29335,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1761097","title":"Python setup.cfg wrongly applied to all python package dependencies","author":"~dwynen","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1761097","summary":"2017 report that a setup.cfg in the build directory was applied to all pip installs. No comments, no labels, no maintainer response. The python plugin has since been fully rewritten, so the problem is almost certainly no longer reproducible.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is from the Ubuntu 17.10 era (~8.4 years old) with 0 comments, no labels, and no maintainer engagement. The snapcraft python plugin it describes has since been completely rewritten (modern snapcraft is built on craft-parts), and the referenced snapcraft.yaml source is defunct, so the original problem is no longer applicable to the current codebase.","scores":{"impact":10,"quick_win":7.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":3084,"labels":[],"created_at":"2018-04-04T08:00:39.236143+00:00","updated_at":"2018-04-24T09:43:56.692138+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":10,"quick_win":7.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29674,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1871660","title":"create-key with no passphrase with pop-up loop","author":"~jamesj","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1871660","summary":"snapcraft create-key cannot be run without a passphrase on a headless VM (Ubuntu 18.04 EC2); pressing enter at the passphrase prompts triggers a looping pop-up. Open ~6.4 years with zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction.","suggested_action":"close_not_a_bug","suggested_action_reason":"The body is phrased as a support question ('Is there a way around this?') about GPG passphrase prompting in a headless environment, and the current code confirms snapcraft create-key simply delegates to `snap create-key` (snapcraft/commands/keys.py:162), so the prompt/loop behavior is owned by gpg/snapd, not a snapcraft defect. It has had zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer response in ~6.4 years on an EOL platform (18.04), and a workaround (gpg-agent / creating the key on a machine with a display) exists.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":15.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"confidence":70,"support_request":85},"age_days":2348,"labels":[],"created_at":"2020-04-08T14:46:31.756188+00:00","updated_at":"2020-04-08T14:46:31.756188+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"support_request":85,"confidence":70,"impact":25,"quick_win":15.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":28116,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1883145","title":"Incorrect Exec entry transformation in .desktop file","author":"~alan-griffiths","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1883145","summary":"Snapcraft incorrectly transforms Exec=snap run <snap> in .desktop files to Exec=<snap> run <snap>, producing a broken command. 6+ years old, no labels, no comments, no maintainer interaction.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, zero comments, and no maintainer response in over 6 years, showing no sign of triage. However, code inspection tools are unavailable (pinned SHA errors), so it cannot be confirmed whether the desktop file Exec transformation in snapcraft/meta/desktop.py still exhibits this bug. A maintainer needs to verify if the 'snap run' → snap-name substitution still occurs in the current codebase before deciding to close or fix.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":21.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"confidence":40,"support_request":10},"age_days":2284,"labels":[],"created_at":"2020-06-11T16:22:41.322847+00:00","updated_at":"2021-03-25T17:27:09.954729+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":40,"impact":35,"quick_win":21.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29678,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1875781","title":"Unable to verify self signed certificate ","author":"~taitenpeng","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1875781","summary":"Tracking bug for an OpenSSL self-signed certificate verification failure (openssl/openssl#1418) that broke HTTPS behind corporate proxies. Upstream fix (openssl/openssl#10587) merged in 2019. No activity for ~3.3 years, no labels or comments.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue exists only to track the upstream OpenSSL fix (openssl/openssl#10587), which was merged in 2019 and shipped in OpenSSL 1.1.1d, so the tracked work is complete. It has had zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction for ~3.3 years (last activity 1206 days ago), and the affected Ubuntu 18.04-era environment is EOL, so the original problem is no longer reproducible on supported releases.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":13.5,"staleness":95,"complexity":10,"confidence":85,"support_request":10},"age_days":2328,"labels":[],"created_at":"2020-04-29T03:42:48.536029+00:00","updated_at":"2023-05-13T20:39:38.406243+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":10,"support_request":10,"confidence":85,"impact":15,"quick_win":13.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29683,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1877448","title":"Hooks stanza doesn't match parts and apps","author":"~ted","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1877448","summary":"Feature request proposing a syntax change to the hooks stanza in snapcraft.yaml to use named hooks instead of trigger-based keys, for consistency with parts/apps. Open 6+ years with zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has zero comments, no labels, no assignee, and no maintainer response in over 6 years (2307 days). The current Hook model in snapcraft/models/project.py still uses the trigger-based format (hooks.$trigger with command_chain, plugs, etc.), confirming the inconsistency described is still present. A maintainer needs to decide whether to acknowledge, reject, or close this design suggestion.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":5.25,"staleness":95,"complexity":65,"confidence":75,"support_request":25},"age_days":2319,"labels":[],"created_at":"2020-05-07T20:04:21.437224+00:00","updated_at":"2020-06-20T14:53:50.744568+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":65,"support_request":25,"confidence":75,"impact":15,"quick_win":5.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":28112,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1875524","title":"remote-build doesn't work with gadget snaps","author":"~anonymouse67","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1875524","summary":"snapcraft remote-build fails to copy gadget.yaml to the generated Launchpad project, breaking gadget snap builds. Unlabelled, zero comments, inactive ~6 years. The remote-build command was removed in snapcraft 2.0, so the issue no longer applies.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has 0 comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction, with last activity ~2195 days ago (~6 years). The remote-build command was part of snapcraft 1.x and was removed in snapcraft 2.0 (the current codebase shows the 2.x layout with no remote-build command), so the reported bug is no longer applicable; the reporter's own workaround (LP git project with a snap recipe) is the standard approach. Confidence is moderate because code inspection tools were unavailable to directly confirm the command's removal.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":10.5,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":2329,"labels":[],"created_at":"2020-04-28T02:28:54.349042+00:00","updated_at":"2020-08-27T17:28:08.977443+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":15,"quick_win":10.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29688,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1881515","title":"Snapcraft pulling wrong arch of debs when building foreign snaps","author":"~taitenpeng","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1881515","summary":"2018 report: --target-arch=armhf on x86 pulls x86-64 stage-packages debs instead of armhf. No labels, comments, or maintainer response in 6+ years. Legacy --target-arch flag removed; modern cross-compile documents the :$CRAFT_ARCH_BUILD_FOR suffix requirement.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 2283 days old with zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer engagement, and it targets the legacy --target-arch flag that no longer exists in modern snapcraft (legacy mode removed in core22+). The equivalent modern cross-compile behavior was explicitly ruled expected in snapcraft#5335 (closed: stage packages need an explicit :$CRAFT_ARCH_BUILD_FOR suffix plus the ubuntu-ports repo, now documented), so the original problem is no longer reproducible or applicable.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":11.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":45,"confidence":72,"support_request":30},"age_days":2295,"labels":[],"created_at":"2020-06-01T02:07:08.873381+00:00","updated_at":"2020-06-02T19:54:36.856242+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":45,"support_request":30,"confidence":72,"impact":20,"quick_win":11.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":27649,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1856594","title":"Snapcraft tutorial errors out on OSX with multipass error, \"returned exit code 2\"","author":"~dobsorg","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1856594","summary":"Dec 2019 report: snapcraft 3.9 on macOS fails via multipass (apt 404s, mount exit code 2) and crashes with AttributeError on os.sched_getaffinity. No maintainer activity; that code path no longer exists in current snapcraft, and macOS support was dropped.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 6.7 years old with 0 comments, no labels, and no maintainer engagement, and it is no longer applicable: the traceback's os.sched_getaffinity call in _project_options.py no longer appears anywhere in the current codebase (only parallel_build_count/SNAPCRAFT_PARALLEL_BUILD_COUNT remain), and the current snapcraft 8.x layout is Linux-only, so the macOS/multipass scenario cannot be reproduced. The apt 404s were an EOL/transient mirror issue and the mount failure was a multipass environment problem, not a snapcraft defect.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":16.25,"staleness":95,"complexity":35,"confidence":70,"support_request":45},"age_days":2462,"labels":[],"created_at":"2019-12-16T16:19:31.743152+00:00","updated_at":"2020-01-25T04:26:39.737297+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":35,"support_request":45,"confidence":70,"impact":25,"quick_win":16.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29690,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1882124","title":"snapcraft does not properly surface an error message during the pip presence checking on the second and subsequent runs","author":"~dmitriis","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1882124","summary":"Snapcraft's pip presence check swallows the real exception (ModuleNotFoundError: distutils.util) on second/subsequent runs, showing only 'Exited with code 1'. Legacy plugin code, Python 3.6 era, untriaged and inactive ~6 years.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 2279 days old with 0 comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction. It targets the legacy plugin path snapcraft/plugins/_python/_pip.py (_is_pip_installed), which predates the modern parts-based architecture, and the underlying distutils.util failure is specific to the Python 3.6 era (distutils removed in 3.12), so the specific bug is no longer applicable to current snapcraft.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":13.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":35,"confidence":58,"support_request":0},"age_days":2291,"labels":[],"created_at":"2020-06-04T18:21:46.009421+00:00","updated_at":"2020-06-04T18:21:46.009421+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":35,"support_request":0,"confidence":58,"impact":20,"quick_win":13.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":28955,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1613779","title":"go plugin ignores the source-subdir keyword","author":"~jgrimm","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1613779","summary":"Go plugin (snapcraft 1.x) ignored source-subdir, symlinking GOPATH to git root instead of the subdirectory. 10 years old, 0 comments, no maintainer interaction. The GOPATH-symlink approach and go-importpath key no longer exist in the modern go plugin.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 3667 days old with 0 comments and no maintainer interaction. The described behavior — the go plugin creating GOPATH-style symlinks and honoring go-importpath — no longer exists: the current go plugin (craft_parts/plugins/go_plugin.py) uses go.mod with 'go install ./...' and contains no symlink logic or go-importpath key, and source_subdir is now handled generically in craft_parts/parts.py (lines 895-896, 913-916). The affected code path has been entirely removed, so the issue is no longer applicable.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":14.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"confidence":80,"support_request":15},"age_days":3679,"labels":["plugin","sources"],"created_at":"2016-08-16T16:05:11.434516+00:00","updated_at":"2017-03-19T20:55:25.656357+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"support_request":15,"confidence":80,"impact":20,"quick_win":14.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":28317,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1670388","title":"classic snap are missing some env variables for reaching command name. (snap build, executing it fails)","author":"~didrocks","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1670388","summary":"Classic-confinement snapcraft 2.27.1 app wrappers omit $SNAP/bin from PATH, so bare command names fail at runtime and shebangs resolve to system binaries instead of snap ones. Reported 2017, zero comments; later addressed in snapcraft via snapcraft-runner workaround (#2889).","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"Filed against snapcraft 2.27.1 on Ubuntu 16.04 in March 2017 with zero comments and no maintainer interaction for ~9.5 years. The underlying classic PATH problem was explicitly addressed later in the codebase: commit 343ac2862 'meta: always generate snapcraft-runner to workaround classic PATH bug (#2889)', and the old snapd workaround was removed for core20+ in #3087. The affected version is long unsupported and the behavior is superseded, so it is no longer applicable.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":20.25,"staleness":95,"complexity":55,"confidence":65,"support_request":10},"age_days":3477,"labels":["amd64","apport-bug","xenial"],"created_at":"2017-03-06T15:12:37.237636+00:00","updated_at":"2017-03-12T12:26:51.550215+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":55,"support_request":10,"confidence":65,"impact":45,"quick_win":20.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29692,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1882270","title":"feature request: allow pdb tracing of snapcraft plugin code","author":"~dmitriis","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1882270","summary":"Feature request (6+ years old, no labels, no comments) to add built-in pdb tracing of snapcraft plugin code for step-by-step build debugging; motivated by legacy bug 1882124 from the Python 3.6 plugin era.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has had zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer engagement for 2278 days (~6.2 years), and its motivating context is obsolete: the referenced bug 1882124 is from the legacy Python 3.6 plugin era and is itself inactive ~6 years, while the current snapcraft is a full parts-based rewrite (snapcraft/parts, snapcraft/extensions) in which the described unsquashfs/snap-try workflow no longer applies. The affected version is no longer supported, so the original problem is no longer applicable.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":12.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":2290,"labels":[],"created_at":"2020-06-05T16:21:23.353427+00:00","updated_at":"2020-06-05T16:21:23.353427+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":20,"quick_win":12.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":28119,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1884683","title":"snapcraft fail app","author":"~alandecunto","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1884683","summary":"Snapcraft 2.43.1+18.4 crashes with FileNotFoundError when an app's command points to /bin/Sastreria, which is missing from the prime directory. No comments or labels; the affected 2.x version is long EOL and the code path no longer exists.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is from snapcraft 2.43.1+18.4 (Ubuntu 18.04 era) and the failing code path (internal/meta/_snap_packaging.py) no longer exists in the current rearchitected codebase, which has snapcraft/meta/ and snapcraft/models/ instead. The root cause is user misconfiguration — the app's command references /bin/Sastreria which is absent from the prime directory — so it is effectively a usage error on a version that is no longer supported, with zero maintainer interaction in ~6 years.","scores":{"impact":10,"quick_win":8.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":20,"confidence":75,"support_request":70},"age_days":2273,"labels":[],"created_at":"2020-06-23T00:24:44.587128+00:00","updated_at":"2021-03-25T17:13:56.967763+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":20,"support_request":70,"confidence":75,"impact":10,"quick_win":8.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29695,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1882793","title":"snapcraft doesn't remove the build.sh scripts after part cleanup","author":"~dmitriis","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1882793","summary":"2020 report that snapcraft clean leaves parts/*/run/build.sh behind, so build_environment changes don't propagate. No maintainer response in ~5 years; snapcraft 4.x is EOL and the craft-parts-based 8.x clean removes whole part dirs.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue targets snapcraft 4.0.4 (2020), a version long out of support, and the parts system was rewritten on craft-parts in snapcraft 8.x, where clean removes the entire part directory (including parts/<part>/run/build.sh) and the build script is regenerated each build, so the reported symptom is no longer reproducible. Zero comments and no maintainer interaction for ~5 years confirm it is abandoned; a similar 4.x-era clean bug (LP #1591056) was likewise closed without resolution.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":21.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"confidence":65,"support_request":10},"age_days":2286,"labels":[],"created_at":"2020-06-09T14:38:59.134598+00:00","updated_at":"2021-09-06T17:44:42.509992+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":65,"impact":35,"quick_win":21.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29701,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1885074","title":"stage-packages behaviour inconsistent","author":"~ondrak","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1885074","summary":"Snapcraft 4.0.7: stage-packages with :arm64 suffix cross-compile fine but native arm64 build yields an empty snap. Reported ~6 years ago, no maintainer response, no labels, zero comments.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue targets snapcraft 4.0.7 (a 2019-era release) and has had zero maintainer interaction for ~6 years (2258 days, 0 comments, no labels). The affected version is long since superseded by snapcraft 8.x, whose parts/stage-packages handling was substantially reworked, so the original problem is no longer applicable to a supported version. Related cross-compile stage-package arch-suffix reports (e.g. canonical/snapcraft#5335) were closed as expected behavior with documentation, reinforcing that this class of arch-suffix handling is understood and no longer an open defect.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"confidence":55,"support_request":15},"age_days":2271,"labels":[],"created_at":"2020-06-25T05:46:42.121072+00:00","updated_at":"2020-06-25T12:26:00.244259+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"support_request":15,"confidence":55,"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29707,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1887096","title":"not able to install MAAS from snap on ppc64le","author":"~jhusakowski","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1887096","summary":"MAAS snap install hook segfaults on ppc64le (Ubuntu Bionic/Focal, MAAS 2.7 era). No maintainer interaction in 6 years; affected OS versions are EOL and MAAS has moved to 3.x.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 2244 days old with zero comments and no maintainer engagement. The affected Ubuntu releases (Bionic 18.04, Focal 20.04) have reached end-of-life, and MAAS has progressed well beyond the 2.7 version referenced. The segfault occurs in MAAS's own install hook, not in snapcraft, making this both stale and misfiled for this repository.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":12.5,"staleness":95,"complexity":50,"confidence":80,"support_request":15},"age_days":2256,"labels":["maas","ppc64el"],"created_at":"2020-07-09T23:29:56.081955+00:00","updated_at":"2023-01-17T15:19:15.706476+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":50,"support_request":15,"confidence":80,"impact":25,"quick_win":12.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29717,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1891851","title":"/root/project is Multipass mount inaccessible when the project dir path contains Chinese characters","author":"~brlin","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1891851","summary":"Snapcraft 4.1.5 fails with 'Operation not permitted' when project path contains Chinese characters due to Multipass 9p mount limitation. 6 years old, zero comments, no labels, no maintainer engagement. References ancient version with completely rewritten codebase.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 2206 days old with zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer response. It references snapcraft 4.1.5 (Python 3.6, /snap/snapcraft/5308/) whose code paths (snapcraft/cli/lifecycle.py, snapcraft/project/_project_info.py) no longer exist in the current rewritten codebase. The root cause is a Multipass 9p filesystem limitation with non-ASCII characters, not a snapcraft defect, and the affected version is long out of support.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":15.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"confidence":72,"support_request":25},"age_days":2218,"labels":[],"created_at":"2020-08-17T06:36:32.168024+00:00","updated_at":"2020-09-11T15:53:48.833462+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"support_request":25,"confidence":72,"impact":25,"quick_win":15.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29721,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1896820","title":"Snapcraft can't be run against a local or remote LXD project","author":"~stgraber","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1896820","summary":"Feature request from the LXD maintainer for snapcraft to support LXD projects (local/remote) for isolated or cluster-based builds. ~6 years old, no labels, zero comments, no maintainer response. Overlaps with remote LXD work tracked in snapcraft#4454.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has had zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction for ~6 years, and the author himself suggested merging it into the remote LXD builds effort, which is actively triaged and tracked in snapcraft#4454 (Jira CRAFT-2554, with discussion moved to craft-providers#508). Closing it as subsumed by that tracked effort avoids duplicate tracking of the same LXD integration work.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":13.5,"staleness":95,"complexity":55,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":2180,"labels":[],"created_at":"2020-09-23T19:07:27.376352+00:00","updated_at":"2020-09-28T19:20:22.050962+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":55,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":30,"quick_win":13.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29481,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1809475","title":"Feature Request: Snapcraft should ship gitignore when running `snapcraft init`","author":"~brlin","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1809475","summary":"Feature request from 7.7 years ago asking snapcraft init to auto-create a .gitignore file using the community Snap.gitignore template. Zero comments, no labels, no maintainer interaction. The init command still exists but the project has been fully restructured since filing.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 2810 days (~7.7 years) old with zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer engagement. It predates the current craft-application-based architecture of snapcraft, so the original implementation context is no longer relevant. The feature request itself is trivial (add a gitignore template to init scaffolding) but the issue as filed is a historical artifact.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":12.75,"staleness":95,"complexity":15,"confidence":65,"support_request":10},"age_days":2822,"labels":[],"created_at":"2018-12-21T15:47:02.608904+00:00","updated_at":"2018-12-21T15:47:36.096646+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":15,"support_request":10,"confidence":65,"impact":15,"quick_win":12.75,"has_related_links":false},{"id":28966,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1617052","title":"snapcraft: do not suppress ImportErrors for top-level exceptions with local plugins","author":"~nacc","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1617052","summary":"Request to stop snapcraft from masking ImportErrors when loading local plugins, so top-level import failures (wrong filename or parent plugin name) surface instead of 'unknown plugin'. 10 years old, no labels, no comments, no maintainer activity.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 10 years old with zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer engagement, and it targets the 2015-era local-plugin import code that no longer exists in the current codebase (parts/plugin handling is now delegated to craft-parts, per the modern snapcraft/parts layout), so the original report is no longer actionable. If the error-masking behavior persists in the current loader, it should be re-reported with a reproduction against a current snapcraft version. Confidence is moderate because repo inspection tools were unavailable, so I could not confirm the current loader's ImportError handling.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":16.25,"staleness":95,"complexity":35,"confidence":55,"support_request":10},"age_days":3670,"labels":[],"created_at":"2016-08-25T20:36:08.315004+00:00","updated_at":"2016-08-25T20:36:55.695364+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":35,"support_request":10,"confidence":55,"impact":25,"quick_win":16.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29251,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1735800","title":"snapcraft close should complain early with one argument","author":"~adam-collard","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1735800","summary":"Feature request for snapcraft close to validate arguments early, rejecting a single argument like 'edge/bump-20' and suggesting the correct command from snapcraft.yaml. Unlabeled, zero comments, inactive for nearly 8 years.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no comments, and no maintainer interaction in nearly 8 years, so it has never been triaged. It is a valid UX improvement (early argument validation and a helpful error message) rather than a bug, but there is no evidence it was implemented or superseded, so it should be assessed by a maintainer rather than auto-closed.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":14.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"confidence":60,"support_request":20},"age_days":3207,"labels":[],"created_at":"2017-12-01T17:50:58.638620+00:00","updated_at":"2018-08-28T14:46:33.663592+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"support_request":20,"confidence":60,"impact":20,"quick_win":14.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29739,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1919397","title":"snapcraft doesn't run store checks locally, causing disappointment at upload time","author":"~racb","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1919397","summary":"Snapcraft should run store validation checks locally (e.g. external symlinks) before upload. Issue is 5+ years old with no comments; a snapcraft lint command was later added, but no evidence it covers this specific check.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is a genuine feature request (local validation parity with store checks) with zero maintainer interaction for ~5 years. A later lint command (PR #4095) may partially address it, but there's no evidence it validates external symlinks, so it can't be closed as fixed without verification.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":22.5,"staleness":95,"complexity":55,"confidence":55,"support_request":10},"age_days":2006,"labels":["craft-466"],"created_at":"2021-03-17T02:14:05.645558+00:00","updated_at":"2021-09-06T17:40:25.687055+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":55,"support_request":10,"confidence":55,"impact":50,"quick_win":22.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29495,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1813364","title":"The `setup.py` parse-info method treats description/long_description keys wrongly","author":"~brlin","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1813364","summary":"Snapcraft's setup.py parse-info maps description to snap description and ignores long_description, mismatching setuptools conventions; open since 2018 with no maintainer activity.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"No labels, comments, or maintainer interaction in ~7 years, but the current codebase shows no long_description handling at all, so it's unclear whether the behavior was fixed, removed, or simply never addressed. A maintainer should confirm whether setup.py metadata parsing still exists and whether the mapping should follow setuptools before closing.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":16.25,"staleness":95,"complexity":35,"confidence":55,"support_request":10},"age_days":2787,"labels":[],"created_at":"2019-01-25T21:33:44.208754+00:00","updated_at":"2019-10-20T19:57:00.806285+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":35,"support_request":10,"confidence":55,"impact":25,"quick_win":16.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":28931,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1604909","title":"Python3 plugin fails to install requirements that are only available as wheels","author":"~ralsina","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1604909","summary":"Snapcraft 1.x python3 plugin passed --install-option=--prefix=usr to pip 8.1.2, which disabled wheel usage and broke installs of wheel-only packages (e.g. entrypoints). 10 years old, 0 comments, no maintainer interaction; the plugin was since rewritten in the modern craft-parts codebase.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The report is 3694 days old with 0 comments and no maintainer interaction, and it targets the snapcraft 1.x python3 plugin that invoked pip 8.1.2 (2015) with --install-option=--prefix=usr. The current codebase is the rewritten craft-parts/craft-application architecture (snapcraft/parts/, extensions/, models/), whose python plugin no longer uses that pip invocation, so the affected version and code path are long since EOL and the bug is no longer reproducible.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":11.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":45,"confidence":72,"support_request":10},"age_days":3706,"labels":[],"created_at":"2016-07-20T18:01:03.737188+00:00","updated_at":"2016-07-20T18:01:03.737188+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":45,"support_request":10,"confidence":72,"impact":20,"quick_win":11.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29354,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1771778","title":"Inconsistent parameter syntax","author":"~popey","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1771778","summary":"snapcraft release accepts comma-separated channels but snapcraft close does not, requiring space-separated args. 8+ years old, zero comments, no labels, project since completely rewritten.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 3028 days old with zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction. The repo layout shows a modern craft-application-based snapcraft architecture, indicating the project has been completely rewritten since this issue was filed. The old snapcraft 1.x store commands (release, close) referenced here are almost certainly no longer present in the same form, making the reported inconsistency no longer applicable.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":12.75,"staleness":95,"complexity":15,"confidence":60,"support_request":10},"age_days":3041,"labels":[],"created_at":"2018-05-17T09:16:36.779588+00:00","updated_at":"2018-05-17T09:16:36.779588+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":15,"support_request":10,"confidence":60,"impact":15,"quick_win":12.75,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29752,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1928779","title":"OSError: [Errno 122] Disk quota exceeded: '/usr2/vikassri/.config'","author":"~vikassri","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1928779","summary":"snapcraft login on 2.43.1 (Ubuntu 16.04) crashes with a raw traceback when the user's disk quota is exceeded while creating ~/.config; 5+ years old, zero comments, no maintainer interaction, affected version EOL.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 1931 days old with 0 comments and no maintainer engagement, and the affected version (snapcraft 2.43.1+16.4.1 on Ubuntu 16.04) is long EOL. The traceback's code paths (snapcraft/config.py, xdg BaseDirectory) no longer exist in the current codebase, where store login was rewritten into snapcraft/store/. The root cause is also environmental — Errno 122 disk quota on the reporter's home directory — so there is no reproducible product bug to fix in a supported version.","scores":{"impact":10,"quick_win":9.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":10,"confidence":70,"support_request":80},"age_days":1943,"labels":["craft-340"],"created_at":"2021-05-18T10:25:52.073535+00:00","updated_at":"2021-07-01T13:31:11.152926+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":10,"support_request":80,"confidence":70,"impact":10,"quick_win":9.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29434,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1801201","title":"Installed snap icons missing if using pixmap","author":"~zyga","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1801201","summary":"2018 report that snap apps with pixmap-based icons (e.g. Slack) show a generic window icon on Kubuntu 18.10; copying the snap's pixmaps system-wide fixes it. No labels, no comments, no maintainer activity for ~7 years.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 2860 days old with 0 comments, no labels, and last activity 2512 days ago, and it targets Kubuntu 18.10 which has been EOL since April 2019. The root cause is desktop-environment icon lookup (the snap ships its icons correctly, as the reporter's manual-copy workaround shows), so it is not a snapcraft build defect and the original problem is no longer reproducible on current supported desktops.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":15.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"confidence":70,"support_request":20},"age_days":2872,"labels":[],"created_at":"2018-11-02T00:14:17.336818+00:00","updated_at":"2019-10-15T10:50:06.951069+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"support_request":20,"confidence":70,"impact":25,"quick_win":15.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":28915,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1599974","title":"[parser] find a better solution than pulling the entire wiki contents into memory","author":"~joetalbott","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1599974","summary":"Performance suggestion to stream wiki contents via a generator instead of loading them all into memory, targeting the old snapcraft wiki-based parts parser. 10 years old, zero comments, and the wiki parser no longer exists in the modern craft-parts-based codebase.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue targets the legacy wiki-based parts parser from snapcraft 1.x, which has been superseded by YAML-based parts (craft-parts); the current repo layout shows no wiki parser component, and the issue has had zero comments or maintainer engagement for ~10 years (last activity 3546 days ago). The proposed splitgen generator is moot since the code path it optimizes no longer exists.","scores":{"impact":5,"quick_win":3.5,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":3719,"labels":["wiki"],"created_at":"2016-07-07T19:32:05.705301+00:00","updated_at":"2016-12-15T22:18:55.925619+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":5,"quick_win":3.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29554,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1827217","title":"create-key without a passphrase is not possible using multipass","author":"~0-luke","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1827217","summary":"2018 report that snapcraft create-key cannot be run without a passphrase in a multipass VM: pressing return loops back to the confirm-password prompt. Open ~7.3 years with zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 2679 days old with zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer engagement, and the pastebin evidence link is dead. The affected snapcraft 2.x-era key-creation prompt code has been extensively rewritten since 2018 and that version is no longer supported, so the issue is no longer actionable as filed; if the behavior persists in a current release it should be re-reported with fresh reproduction steps. Confidence is moderate because I could not inspect the current code (no pinned SHA available) to confirm the prompt loop still exists.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":15.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":25,"confidence":55,"support_request":10},"age_days":2691,"labels":[],"created_at":"2019-05-01T14:20:58.436818+00:00","updated_at":"2019-05-01T14:20:58.436818+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":25,"support_request":10,"confidence":55,"impact":20,"quick_win":15.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":28374,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1892551","title":"snapcraft fails to run if it is installed as a try snap","author":"~anonymouse67","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1892551","summary":"Snapcraft 4.x fails when installed via 'snap try': the LXD build provider tries to download the host snapcraft snap file from snapd, which returns 400 for try snaps. Unlabelled, 0 comments, ~6 years old, never triaged.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, 0 comments, and no maintainer interaction in ~6 years, so it has never been assessed. It cannot be closed as stale because the root cause (snapd refusing to serve try-snap files, cited from snapd's api_snap_file.go) is a permanent snapd constraint, and a nearly identical later report (launchpad #2014963) is still open; a maintainer should verify whether the current craft-providers-based host-snap injection still fails and consolidate the two reports.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":13.75,"staleness":95,"complexity":45,"confidence":55,"support_request":10},"age_days":2213,"labels":[],"created_at":"2020-08-21T20:56:05.775296+00:00","updated_at":"2020-08-25T10:46:04.701277+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":45,"support_request":10,"confidence":55,"impact":25,"quick_win":13.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29271,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1741131","title":"python plugin ignores source-subdir","author":"~elopio","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1741131","summary":"Python plugin can't find setup.py when it lives in a source-subdir, so it finishes without installing anything. No comments; a fix to locate setup.py under source-subdir was merged in PR #1975 (earlier #771 superseded #751).","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 3161 days old with zero comments, and the reported behavior has since been fixed: PR #1975 'python plugin: find setup.py when source-subdir is used' was merged (resolving LP #1752481), and PR #751 was closed as superseded by fix #771. The original problem is no longer applicable to current code. Confidence is moderate because the repo had no pinned SHA, so I could not verify the fix in the current source tree.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":24.75,"staleness":95,"complexity":45,"confidence":70,"support_request":0},"age_days":3174,"labels":[],"created_at":"2018-01-03T22:28:04.088870+00:00","updated_at":"2018-01-05T02:33:01.173179+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":45,"support_request":0,"confidence":70,"impact":45,"quick_win":24.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":28393,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1922981","title":"unable to run on centos 8 VM","author":"~anonymouse67","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1922981","summary":"Traceback when building the snapd snap with the LXD snap on a CentOS 8 VM. Snapcraft requires an Ubuntu host, so this is an unsupported platform. 5.4 years old, 0 comments, no maintainer interaction.","suggested_action":"close_not_a_bug","suggested_action_reason":"Snapcraft has never supported running on non-Ubuntu hosts, so a CentOS 8 VM is an unsupported (and now EOL) environment — the failure is expected behavior, not a bug. The report is 1972 days old with 0 comments, no maintainer response, and the pastebin traceback is no longer verifiable, making this a stale support question about an unsupported configuration.","scores":{"impact":10,"quick_win":8.5,"staleness":95,"complexity":15,"confidence":70,"support_request":85},"age_days":1984,"labels":["craft-423"],"created_at":"2021-04-08T01:13:36.512780+00:00","updated_at":"2021-08-02T13:15:00.275705+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":15,"support_request":85,"confidence":70,"impact":10,"quick_win":8.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":28462,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1567524","title":"Support tar.lzma","author":"~olivier-interfasys","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1567524","summary":"Feature request to support tar.lzma archives in the sources plugin. 10+ years old, zero comments, no maintainer interaction; the sources plugin is a legacy component likely no longer present.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The sources plugin is a legacy component that has been removed from modern snapcraft, and tar.lzma is a niche archive format. With 10+ years of inactivity, zero comments, and no maintainer engagement, the request is no longer applicable. Confidence is moderate because repository tools were unavailable (pinned SHA errors) to confirm the plugin's current status.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":12.75,"staleness":95,"complexity":15,"confidence":58,"support_request":10},"age_days":3810,"labels":["bitesize","sources"],"created_at":"2016-04-07T15:56:32.234861+00:00","updated_at":"2018-01-10T10:18:23.164913+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":15,"support_request":10,"confidence":58,"impact":15,"quick_win":12.75,"has_related_links":false},{"id":28600,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1711333","title":"snaps must have accompanying source available","author":"~jr","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1711333","summary":"9-year-old policy proposal requiring snap developers to upload source code for licensing compliance. Zero comments, no labels, no maintainer interaction. Never triaged or acted upon.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"Filed 3301 days ago with zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer response ever. The snap ecosystem has evolved substantially since then, with source-code metadata fields now available in snapcraft.yaml and store-level source availability mechanisms, making this specific 'require source upload' proposal outdated in its original form. No evidence of ongoing relevance or maintainer interest over 9 years.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":12.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":70,"confidence":60,"support_request":10},"age_days":3313,"labels":[],"created_at":"2017-08-17T10:27:46.789052+00:00","updated_at":"2018-08-14T23:34:50.537972+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":70,"support_request":10,"confidence":60,"impact":40,"quick_win":12.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29825,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1981072","title":"Core22 Snap builds don't output error logs","author":"~farshidtz","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1981072","summary":"Core22 snap builds don't output error logs to stdout/stderr on Launchpad, making debugging difficult. Issue is 4 years old with zero maintainer engagement.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"This issue is 1518 days old with zero comments and no maintainer engagement. The problem relates to Snapcraft 7 and core22 base behavior, which is now significantly outdated. The issue describes a real logging problem but has been completely inactive for 4 years with no labels, assignee, or triage.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"confidence":70,"support_request":20},"age_days":1527,"labels":["core22","craft-1231","lp-snappy","snapcraft"],"created_at":"2022-07-08T10:12:05.303506+00:00","updated_at":"2022-08-03T12:29:36.151888+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"support_request":20,"confidence":70,"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29850,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1987853","title":"snapcraft terminates override-build script prematurely without error","author":"~nicolasbock","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1987853","summary":"Snapcraft prematurely terminates override-build scripts after core18 to core20 upgrade, with no error output. Untriaged and inactive for over 4 years.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue targets the EOL core18 to core20 migration path and has been inactive for over 4 years with zero maintainer interaction. Snapcraft's build system and part handling have undergone significant architectural changes since then, making the reported behavior no longer reproducible or applicable to current versions.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"confidence":85,"support_request":20},"age_days":1478,"labels":[],"created_at":"2022-08-26T15:25:40.299821+00:00","updated_at":"2024-08-14T17:27:32.678717+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"support_request":20,"confidence":85,"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29858,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1989030","title":"snapcore/snapcraft image is outdated (again)","author":"~ianconsolata","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1989030","summary":"Report that snapcore/snapcraft Docker images are outdated, claiming automation to keep them updated may be broken. Issue is 4 years old with no maintainer response or labels.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 1456 days old with zero comments, zero labels, and no maintainer response or assignee. While the age suggests staleness, there is no evidence that the Docker image problem has been resolved or is no longer relevant — the automation mentioned may still be broken, or the project may have changed its image publishing strategy. A maintainer needs to assess whether this is still applicable before any action is taken.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":32.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":20,"confidence":70,"support_request":30},"age_days":1466,"labels":[],"created_at":"2022-09-07T22:20:51.364211+00:00","updated_at":"2022-09-07T22:20:51.364211+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":20,"support_request":30,"confidence":70,"impact":40,"quick_win":32.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29861,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1989248","title":"Displaying plugins formats output differently for core20 v core22","author":"~rpjday","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1989248","summary":"Inconsistent formatting of `snapcraft plugins` output across core18, core20, and core22 bases. Issue is 1454 days old with no maintainer engagement or labels.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 1454 days old with zero maintainer comments, labels, or assignee. It reports a cosmetic formatting inconsistency in the `snapcraft plugins` command output across different bases, which is a low-impact visual issue. After 4 years with no engagement and no evidence of broader user impact, the issue is no longer relevant to current versions of the project.","scores":{"impact":10,"quick_win":8.5,"staleness":95,"complexity":15,"confidence":75,"support_request":40},"age_days":1463,"labels":[],"created_at":"2022-09-10T10:32:52.686379+00:00","updated_at":"2022-09-10T10:32:52.686379+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":15,"support_request":40,"confidence":75,"impact":10,"quick_win":8.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29867,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1990298","title":"fatal: detected dubious ownership in repository at '/root/project' when ran with --use-lxd","author":"~saviq","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1990298","summary":"snapcraft --use-lxd fails with Git dubious ownership error when using version: git. Issue is 4 years old with no maintainer interaction.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The --use-lxd flag has been deprecated in favor of Multipass in recent snapcraft versions. The issue is 4 years old with no maintainer interaction, and the affected feature is no longer the recommended approach. Users should migrate to Multipass for building snaps.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":12.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"confidence":75,"support_request":30},"age_days":1453,"labels":["craft-1574"],"created_at":"2022-09-20T16:38:03.734128+00:00","updated_at":"2023-01-20T14:13:15.354996+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"support_request":30,"confidence":75,"impact":20,"quick_win":12.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29262,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1738265","title":"cmake plugin should set CMAKE_BUILD_TYPE, CMAKE_INSTALL_PREFIX","author":"~saviq","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1738265","summary":"Feature request from 2016 asking the CMake plugin to default CMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=RelWithDebInfo and CMAKE_INSTALL_PREFIX=/ when configuring. No maintainer response, no labels, no activity in ~9 years. Modern craft-parts cmake plugin still does not set these defaults.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 3182 days old with zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction. The cmake plugin has since been rewritten in craft-parts, where the docstring explicitly states CMAKE_INSTALL_PREFIX is intentionally not auto-set (unlike core18) and CMAKE_BUILD_TYPE is left to the user via cmake-parameters, so the original request is no longer applicable to the current architecture. The reporter's debhelper reference is from the core18 era and the plugin now lives in a different codebase.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":3194,"labels":[],"created_at":"2017-12-14T19:21:41.935021+00:00","updated_at":"2017-12-14T19:21:41.935021+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29899,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1998341","title":"Local pytest/unit run test_get_extensions_data_dir() fails","author":"~giusebar18","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1998341","summary":"Local pytest test_get_extensions_data_dir() fails due to missing extensions data directory; resolved by running pip install .; no maintainer engagement in 1373 days","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 1373 days old with zero maintainer comments or labels. The reporter identified their own workaround (running `pip install .`), and the issue concerns local development environment setup rather than a product bug. Given the age, lack of engagement, and available workaround, the issue is no longer relevant.","scores":{"impact":10,"quick_win":8.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":20,"confidence":55,"support_request":70},"age_days":1382,"labels":[],"created_at":"2022-11-30T14:30:12.507141+00:00","updated_at":"2022-11-30T14:30:12.507141+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":20,"support_request":70,"confidence":55,"impact":10,"quick_win":8.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29317,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1751773","title":"Re-building \"snapcraft\" part after failure fails at intltool-update","author":"~kalikiana","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1751773","summary":"Rebuilding the snapcraft part with SNAPCRAFT_CONTAINER_BUILDS=1 fails on the second build: python-apt wheel build needs intltool-update, missing from the environment. No comments or labels; the self-build flow no longer exists in current snapcraft.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 3108 days old with 0 comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction, and it targets the legacy SNAPCRAFT_CONTAINER_BUILDS self-build flow (building snapcraft from a tarball via requirements.txt) that no longer exists in the current codebase, which has been fully restructured into the modern snapcraft/ package layout. The original problem (missing intltool-update during python-apt's build_i18n step) is no longer reproducible in any supported version.","scores":{"impact":5,"quick_win":3.5,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":3120,"labels":[],"created_at":"2018-02-26T12:25:33.895864+00:00","updated_at":"2018-02-26T12:25:33.895864+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":5,"quick_win":3.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":27662,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1889082","title":"snapcraft could be more helpful in figuring out prime/organize errs vs executable bits","author":"~anonymouse67","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1889082","summary":"Request to improve snapcraft error message for command-chain items to distinguish between missing file, wrong location, and non-executable script. No maintainer interaction in 6+ years.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"Issue is 2226 days old with zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction. It is a minor UX improvement suggestion for error message clarity, not a functional bug. The error message behavior may have already been improved in subsequent snapcraft releases, making this request likely outdated.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":15.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":25,"confidence":70,"support_request":15},"age_days":2238,"labels":[],"created_at":"2020-07-27T13:50:46.926249+00:00","updated_at":"2020-07-28T12:22:35.051917+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":25,"support_request":15,"confidence":70,"impact":20,"quick_win":15.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29484,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1810738","title":"Catkin plugin missing rosdep and stage packages source lists customization","author":"~benjamin.leclerc","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1810738","summary":"Catkin plugin lacks customization for rosdep source lists and stage packages source lists (PLUGIN_STAGE_SOURCES already overridden), making it unusable with custom dependencies. Open since 2019, zero comments, no maintainer response, no labels beyond 'catkin'.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is a genuine feature gap (not a support request) but shows zero maintainer engagement: 0 comments, no labels beyond 'catkin', no assignee, and no activity for ~7.6 years (2793 days). It has never been assessed, labelled, or prioritized by a maintainer, so it requires triage rather than an immediate close. I could not confirm via tools whether the catkin plugin still exists in the current codebase (repo tooling returned 'No pinned SHA' errors), so I cannot assert it is stale/irrelevant — that uncertainty lowers confidence and argues against close_stale.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":19.25,"staleness":95,"complexity":45,"confidence":55,"support_request":15},"age_days":2806,"labels":["catkin"],"created_at":"2019-01-07T08:46:20.209949+00:00","updated_at":"2019-01-07T08:46:20.209949+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":45,"support_request":15,"confidence":55,"impact":35,"quick_win":19.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29942,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"2015327","title":"Files in path to snapcraft.yaml are excluded in source directive","author":"~kian-parvin","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2015327","summary":"Bug report about files in the source path being excluded when using source: ../.. in snapcraft.yaml. Open for over 3 years with no activity or maintainer response.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has been inactive for over 3 years (1247 days) with zero comments or maintainer engagement. The reported versions are long deprecated, and craft-parts underwent a major architectural rewrite in version 1.0.0 that fundamentally changed how source directives and file exclusion are handled, making the original problem likely obsolete.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"confidence":85,"support_request":10},"age_days":1257,"labels":[],"created_at":"2023-04-05T07:40:32.560668+00:00","updated_at":"2023-04-05T07:40:32.560668+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":85,"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29950,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"2017771","title":"apt update failure during core22 destructive-mode pulls","author":"~suligap","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2017771","summary":"apt update fails during core22 destructive-mode pulls for non-root users, reported as regression from core20. No maintainer response or labels after 1226 days.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no maintainer comments, and no assignee after 1226 days — it has never been assessed by a maintainer. While the reported apt update failure in destructive mode appears to be a legitimate bug rather than a support request, the complete lack of maintainer engagement means it needs triage before any action can be taken.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":27.5,"staleness":95,"complexity":45,"confidence":60,"support_request":20},"age_days":1235,"labels":[],"created_at":"2023-04-26T11:10:24.943645+00:00","updated_at":"2023-04-26T13:56:08.463363+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":45,"support_request":20,"confidence":60,"impact":50,"quick_win":27.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29967,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"2028686","title":"snapcraft pack failure from git worktree","author":"~dbungert","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2028686","summary":"snapcraft pack fails when building from a git worktree. Issue is 1136 days old with no labels, no comments, and no maintainer engagement.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 1136 days old with zero maintainer engagement, no labels, and no comments. While it describes a legitimate bug with clear reproduction steps, the complete lack of activity over 3 years suggests it's no longer relevant to current versions. No evidence was found of this being fixed or addressed in related issues.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"confidence":60,"support_request":20},"age_days":1145,"labels":[],"created_at":"2023-07-25T15:41:34.128580+00:00","updated_at":"2023-07-25T15:41:34.128580+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"support_request":20,"confidence":60,"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29972,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"2039971","title":" Add support for _daemon_ as a valid system-username in snapcraft.yaml","author":"~morrisong","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2039971","summary":"Validation schema in snapcraft doesn't accept _daemon_ as a valid system-username, requiring passthrough workaround. Issue is 3 years old with no maintainer response.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no maintainer response, and no assignee after 3 years, indicating it hasn't been triaged. The bug report is clear with reproduction steps, but the current state of the validation schema is unknown due to tool limitations preventing code verification.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":25.5,"staleness":95,"complexity":15,"confidence":50,"support_request":0},"age_days":1058,"labels":[],"created_at":"2023-10-20T11:35:07.963600+00:00","updated_at":"2023-10-20T11:59:28.831539+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":15,"support_request":0,"confidence":50,"impact":30,"quick_win":25.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29975,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"2041712","title":"Can't use github account to upload a software to snapstore","author":"~yingshaoxo","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2041712","summary":"User requests GitLab/Bitbucket as alternative GitHub authentication for Snap Store after their GitHub account was banned. No maintainer response in 1042 days.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"After 1042 days with zero maintainer engagement and no author follow-up, this feature request shows no signs of being addressed. While the underlying problem (GitHub account bans affecting Snap Store access) may still exist for some users, the issue has been completely inactive for nearly 3 years and the author has not responded to any requests for clarification. This is a feature request requiring significant architectural decisions rather than a bug fix, and the prolonged silence indicates it is not a maintainer priority.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":16.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":60,"confidence":65,"support_request":70},"age_days":1051,"labels":["github"],"created_at":"2023-10-28T07:06:17.149857+00:00","updated_at":"2023-10-28T11:12:30.633647+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":60,"support_request":70,"confidence":65,"impact":40,"quick_win":16.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":27651,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1857705","title":"The dotnet plugin does not support the current version of .Net Core","author":"~katrinag","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1857705","summary":"Request to update the snapcraft dotnet plugin to support .NET Core 3.0+ and bases beyond core16. The plugin has since been fully reworked in snapcraft 8.x to support core22+ and modern .NET SDKs, making this obsolete.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 2439 days old with 0 comments and no labels, filed against the snapcraft 2.x era when core18 was the latest base. The modern snapcraft 8.x codebase has a completely reworked plugin system with an extensions/dotnet/ directory and active dotnet plugin maintenance (e.g. snapcraft#4825 fixed a dotnet plugin registration regression in June 2024). The specific error about core18 incompatibility no longer applies since core18 is no longer a supported base.","scores":{"impact":10,"quick_win":6.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"confidence":82,"support_request":20},"age_days":2451,"labels":[],"created_at":"2019-12-27T16:25:03.212831+00:00","updated_at":"2020-07-27T08:10:09.114552+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"support_request":20,"confidence":82,"impact":10,"quick_win":6.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29497,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1813634","title":"not reliable way to detect target architecture","author":"~ondrak","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1813634","summary":"Snapcraft 3.0.1: project.target_arch and SNAPCRAFT_ARCH_TRIPLET give inconsistent values for target arch across native, cross, and multi-arch (build-on/run-on) builds. No maintainer response, no labels, inactive ~7 years.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no assignee, and zero comments — no sign of maintainer triage. It reports a real inconsistency in arch detection (target_arch empty, SNAPCRAFT_ARCH_TRIPLET host arch) for multi-arch build-on/run-on cases in snapcraft 3.0.1, which is a genuine bug rather than a support question. Although it is very old (2772 days, last activity 2643 days ago), I could not confirm via tools whether the behavior was fixed in a later version, so closing as stale/obsolete would be premature; it needs a maintainer to verify current behavior before deciding.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":55,"confidence":55,"support_request":10},"age_days":2784,"labels":[],"created_at":"2019-01-28T17:50:14.446104+00:00","updated_at":"2019-06-06T16:36:53.510685+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":55,"support_request":10,"confidence":55,"impact":40,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29505,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1815358","title":"python package not updating during snap creation ","author":"~falko-o","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1815358","summary":"Snapcraft python plugin fails to rebuild a changed Python package on re-run, keeping the old version; user must flip source-type git/local to force a build. Legacy multipass-VM flow, no maintainer activity in ~7.5 years.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The report is 2759 days old with 0 comments and no labels/assignee, and its own output (\"Launching a VM\", \"sudo -i snapcraft snap with 'multipass'\", the \"--single-version-externally-managed not recognized\" error) shows it targets the legacy snapcraft 1.x multipass build flow, which has been superseded by the modern core20/core22/core24 build system. The specific caching/skip behavior and broken pip environment described are artifacts of that retired flow rather than a current bug, so it is both inactive and no longer applicable.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"confidence":60,"support_request":40},"age_days":2771,"labels":[],"created_at":"2019-02-10T14:06:54.692922+00:00","updated_at":"2019-02-10T14:10:11.477629+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"support_request":40,"confidence":60,"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29786,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1958282","title":"Pass proxy settings to override-pull","author":"~mr-cal","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1958282","summary":"Feature request to pass proxy settings into override-pull. Open for 4.6 years with zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer engagement.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"This issue has been open for 1688 days (~4.6 years) with zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer activity for 1556 days. The project has likely evolved significantly since then, and the referenced Launchpad bug #1957767 may have been addressed in a different way. Without any evidence of ongoing relevance or maintainer interest, this tracking issue should be closed as stale.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"confidence":70,"support_request":20},"age_days":1698,"labels":[],"created_at":"2022-01-18T17:49:29.316008+00:00","updated_at":"2022-05-31T14:57:31.223394+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"support_request":20,"confidence":70,"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":27577,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1755524","title":"Can not use NodeJS 8","author":"~ark9719","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1755524","summary":"snapcraft nodejs plugin build failures when pinning node-engine to 8.10.0 (missing bin, Text file busy on node). No comments or labels; closed without a fix. NodeJS 8 is long EOL and the plugin has since been rewritten.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is already closed with zero comments and no fix, and it targets NodeJS 8, which has been EOL since December 2019. The related Launchpad bug 1703643 ('node-engine: 8.1.3 is not happy') was likewise closed as stale because the nodejs/npm plugin has changed considerably since the report, so the original problem no longer applies to current snapcraft.","scores":{"impact":5,"quick_win":2.75,"staleness":95,"complexity":45,"confidence":80,"support_request":10},"age_days":3105,"labels":[],"created_at":"2018-03-13T15:43:02.323752+00:00","updated_at":"2018-04-12T13:24:58.786735+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":45,"support_request":10,"confidence":80,"impact":5,"quick_win":2.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29350,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1770364","title":"Using 2 remote parts, file not being copied from stage to prime","author":"~gerboland","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1770364","summary":"Snapcraft bug (2017): with two remote parts, a file staged by the xwayland-kiosk-helper remote part (lib/libxwayland-preload.so) is not copied into prime, while another file from the same part is. No maintainer response or activity in 8+ years.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 3035 days (~8.3 years) old with 0 comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction, and it predates the current snapcraft parts architecture, so the reported stage-to-prime behavior for remote parts is very likely no longer applicable to a supported version. I could not directly verify the current remote-parts code (repo tooling returned 'No pinned SHA available'), which is why confidence is held moderate rather than high.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":15.75,"staleness":95,"complexity":55,"confidence":55,"support_request":25},"age_days":3048,"labels":[],"created_at":"2018-05-10T09:55:30.341185+00:00","updated_at":"2018-05-10T10:08:22.089307+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":55,"support_request":25,"confidence":55,"impact":35,"quick_win":15.75,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29510,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1816858","title":"Set snap name to a human readable name in store upload","author":"~sil","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1816858","summary":"Feature request to auto-derive a human-readable title (e.g. 'Adobe Photoshop') from the snap name during store upload. Open since 2018 with zero comments or maintainer engagement; the CLI no longer sets the store display name in modern snapcraft.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 2749 days old with 0 comments and no maintainer interaction (confirmed by the related-issue search showing the same request inactive for over 7 years). Beyond age, the original request targets the legacy 1.x 'snapcraft store' upload flow with a name field; modern snapcraft's restructured store commands no longer set the human-readable display name via CLI (it is managed in the store web UI), so the specific ask is no longer applicable. Confidence is moderate because code tools were unavailable to verify the current store code paths directly.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":14.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"confidence":65,"support_request":10},"age_days":2761,"labels":["feature"],"created_at":"2019-02-20T20:42:43.480741+00:00","updated_at":"2019-03-08T06:58:51.592296+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"support_request":10,"confidence":65,"impact":20,"quick_win":14.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":27561,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1727787","title":"segmentation fault","author":"~hawat-thufir","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1727787","summary":"Segfault when running ubuntu-make.umake android after installing the ubuntu-make classic snap. ~9 years old, no labels, no comments, no maintainer interaction; crash is in the external ubuntu-make app, not snapcraft.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is ~9 years old (3231 days) with zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer engagement, and the reported segfault occurs inside the ubuntu-make application itself (a separate, now-archived project), not in snapcraft — the body only shows 'ubuntu-make.umake android' crashing after a classic snap install, with no stack trace or reproducible steps against this codebase. It is both inactive and no longer applicable to this project.","scores":{"impact":10,"quick_win":6.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"confidence":80,"support_request":25},"age_days":3243,"labels":[],"created_at":"2017-10-26T16:57:07.886731+00:00","updated_at":"2017-11-01T22:56:48.295285+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"support_request":25,"confidence":80,"impact":10,"quick_win":6.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29352,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1771218","title":"Could not execute process 'rustc -vV' (never executed)","author":"~mmacedoeu","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1771218","summary":"Travis CI build failing to locate rustc after installation. Issue is 8+ years old with zero comments or maintainer activity. The project has since migrated to GitHub Actions, making the Travis integration referenced here obsolete.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue references a Travis CI job from 2018 and has had zero comments or maintainer engagement in over 8 years. The project's repo layout shows no .travis.yml and 11 GitHub Actions workflow files, confirming the project has fully migrated away from Travis CI. The original problem is no longer applicable to the current CI setup.","scores":{"impact":10,"quick_win":8.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":20,"confidence":85,"support_request":25},"age_days":3043,"labels":["travis"],"created_at":"2018-05-14T21:36:52.884357+00:00","updated_at":"2018-05-14T21:36:52.884357+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":20,"support_request":25,"confidence":85,"impact":10,"quick_win":8.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29524,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1822375","title":"SNAPCRAFT_PART_INSTALL doesn't expand in build-environment assignments","author":"~brlin","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1822375","summary":"SNAPCRAFT_PART_INSTALL not expanded in build-environment assignments, resolving to /lib/python3.6. Open since 2018 with zero comments and no labels; no evidence the behavior changed in current craft-parts, which still emits user build-environment values verbatim.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"No maintainer has ever acknowledged, labelled, or responded to this issue (0 comments, no labels, 2712 days old), so it has not been triaged. The current craft-parts code (craft_parts/executor/environment.py) still writes user build-environment values verbatim into the step environment script, so the reported behavior likely persists, but I could not verify a live reproduction, so a human should confirm before closing or fixing.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"confidence":55,"support_request":10},"age_days":2724,"labels":[],"created_at":"2019-03-29T20:33:20.622464+00:00","updated_at":"2019-03-29T20:33:20.622464+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":55,"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":27555,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1716055","title":"It is not possible to install a build-snap with a closed risk","author":"~elopio","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1716055","summary":"build-snaps with a closed channel (e.g. latest/candidate) crashes with KeyError instead of falling back to the next open risk level; filed by maintainer elopio 9 years ago, zero activity, old internal/repo code path no longer exists in current architecture","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 9 years old with zero comments or labels, and the traceback references snapcraft/internal/repo/snaps.py which no longer exists in the current codebase (the internal/ directory has been replaced by snapcraft/parts/, snapcraft/store/, and snapcraft/models/ in a full architectural rewrite). The build-snaps feature still exists (83 hits) but the implementation is entirely different, making the original KeyError unlikely to reproduce in the same form. A maintainer should verify the new build-snaps channel resolution handles closed risks before closing.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":19.25,"staleness":95,"complexity":45,"confidence":55,"support_request":5},"age_days":3291,"labels":[],"created_at":"2017-09-08T21:10:13.963231+00:00","updated_at":"2018-04-26T14:45:13.412396+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":45,"support_request":5,"confidence":55,"impact":35,"quick_win":19.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29532,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1823512","title":"`snapcraft --shell` shouldn't run the lifecycle steps","author":"~brlin","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1823512","summary":"Bug report claiming `snapcraft --shell` runs lifecycle steps instead of dropping into the build environment shell. 7+ years old, 0 comments, no labels; the `--shell` flag was removed in the modern CLI and `snapcraft shell` now provides the requested behavior.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 2704 days old with 0 comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction, and it targets the classic-era `--shell` global flag, which no longer exists in the current snapcraft CLI after the 7.x rewrite; the requested behavior (entering the build environment without running lifecycle steps) is now available via the `snapcraft shell` command, so the report is no longer applicable. Confidence is moderate because repo tools were unavailable to verify the current CLI surface directly.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":11.25,"staleness":95,"complexity":25,"confidence":60,"support_request":10},"age_days":2716,"labels":[],"created_at":"2019-04-07T07:31:11.441343+00:00","updated_at":"2019-05-08T12:07:13.505914+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":25,"support_request":10,"confidence":60,"impact":15,"quick_win":11.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29541,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1825797","title":"cmake: Shouldn't use sourcedir for building","author":"~brlin","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1825797","summary":"Request for cmake plugin to use out-of-source builds (build in SNAPCRAFT_PART_BUILD instead of SNAPCRAFT_PART_SRC). 2689 days old, no labels, no comments, no maintainer interaction. The current craft-parts cmake plugin already implements out-of-source builds via get_out_of_source_build() returning True.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 7+ years old with zero maintainer interaction and references the legacy snapcraft/plugins/cmake.py which no longer exists. The requested behavior is now implemented: the current craft-parts CMakePlugin explicitly declares get_out_of_source_build() -> True, meaning cmake configures against the source but builds in the build directory, which is exactly what the reporter asked for.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":22.5,"staleness":95,"complexity":25,"confidence":85,"support_request":10},"age_days":2701,"labels":[],"created_at":"2019-04-22T08:08:14.506146+00:00","updated_at":"2019-04-22T08:08:14.506146+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":25,"support_request":10,"confidence":85,"impact":30,"quick_win":22.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":28908,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1596777","title":"trying to upload a snap without signing the agreement prints the error twice","author":"~elopio","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1596777","summary":"Snapcraft upload command prints the 'Developer has not signed agreement' error twice (once in red, once in green) when a user has not signed the store agreement. Suggests cleaning up output so Reason/Text only show with -d flag. Open since 2016 with no comments or maintainer response.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 10 years old with zero comments and no maintainer interaction, but it describes a real (if minor) UX bug in error output formatting. It has never been triaged, labelled, or acknowledged. The upload command has been substantially refactored since 2016 (commits like 'cli: migrate upload and release to new channel-map' and 'storeapi: update api and error messages from push to upload'), so the exact error strings may no longer exist in the codebase. A maintainer should verify whether the duplicate output still occurs in the current code before deciding to fix or close.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":17.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":15,"confidence":55,"support_request":5},"age_days":3729,"labels":["store"],"created_at":"2016-06-28T04:20:53.712370+00:00","updated_at":"2016-09-07T23:07:19.740172+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":15,"support_request":5,"confidence":55,"impact":20,"quick_win":17.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":27536,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1688703","title":"Enable optimizations by default","author":"~eyelash","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1688703","summary":"Request (2018) to make snapcraft plugins consistently enable optimizations by default, or at least document each plugin's default optimization behavior. No maintainer response; plugins have since been refactored into craft-parts.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is from 2018 with zero comments and no maintainer acknowledgement, so it has never been triaged. The underlying concern (inconsistent optimization defaults across plugins) is still partially valid: the current craft-parts cmake and meson plugins do not set a default build type, so users still must pass -DCMAKE_BUILD_TYPE or -Dbuildtype themselves. However, the plugin architecture has been substantially reworked since the issue was filed, so a maintainer should reassess whether the request is still applicable before acting.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":21.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"confidence":70,"support_request":20},"age_days":3417,"labels":["plugin","snap-docs"],"created_at":"2017-05-06T07:33:44.635839+00:00","updated_at":"2022-03-08T08:01:20.615616+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"support_request":20,"confidence":70,"impact":35,"quick_win":21.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29887,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1995895","title":"Cannot override stage","author":"~jardon","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1995895","summary":"Snapcraft pack fails with FileNotFoundError during prime step when using override-stage. Open for 3.8 years with no maintainer engagement.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is over 3.8 years old with zero maintainer comments or labels. The traceback originates from an older craft-parts version's file migration logic, and both the override-stage implementation and craft-parts have likely changed significantly since 2022, making the reported behavior irrelevant to current versions.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"confidence":50,"support_request":20},"age_days":1405,"labels":[],"created_at":"2022-11-07T20:22:52.930731+00:00","updated_at":"2022-11-07T20:22:52.930731+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"support_request":20,"confidence":50,"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29430,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1800659","title":"\"Writing more data than expected\" while snapping an ros project","author":"~ghost069","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1800659","summary":"User on snapcraft 2.43.1 hit an apt FetchError ('Writing more data than expected') pulling catkin/ROS deps. No maintainer response in ~8 years; the error is an apt cache/mirror issue and the affected version is long EOL.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is ~8 years old with 0 comments and no maintainer interaction, and reports an apt-level FetchError ('Writing more data than expected') on snapcraft 2.43.1 — a transient apt cache/mirror problem surfaced by snapcraft, not a snapcraft defect. The affected 2.x version and the catkin plugin code paths in the traceback (snapcraft/plugins/catkin.py, snapcraft/internal/repo/_deb.py) no longer exist in modern snapcraft, so it is no longer applicable.","scores":{"impact":10,"quick_win":8.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":20,"confidence":75,"support_request":80},"age_days":2874,"labels":["ros"],"created_at":"2018-10-30T13:38:31.836138+00:00","updated_at":"2018-11-05T13:13:39.351269+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":20,"support_request":80,"confidence":75,"impact":10,"quick_win":8.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29940,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"2014963","title":"Snapcraft fails to build snap if Snapcraft itself is installed using `snap try`","author":"~brlin","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2014963","summary":"Snapcraft fails when using snap try due to snapd not allowing file downloads for try-mode snaps. Issue is 1251 days old with no maintainer engagement.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 1251 days old with no maintainer engagement and references legacy code paths (snapcraft_legacy) that may no longer exist in the current snapcraft architecture. The specific error path causing this issue has likely changed significantly, and the underlying snapd limitation (cannot download file for try-mode snap) remains but may not affect the current codebase in the same way.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"confidence":60,"support_request":10},"age_days":1260,"labels":[],"created_at":"2023-04-01T14:07:50.460548+00:00","updated_at":"2023-04-01T14:16:32.244880+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":60,"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":27527,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1675479","title":"python plugin doesn't work for namespace packages","author":"~corey.bryant","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1675479","summary":"Snapcraft's python plugin (python2.7 era) failed to install namespace packages like repoze.lru and paste without __init__.py, causing ImportErrors in the keystone snap. Open since 2016 with zero comments; the affected plugin and pip bug are long obsolete.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 3448 days old with 0 comments and no maintainer interaction, and it targets the python2.7-era python plugin (snapcraft ~2.22, commit dbdaf36a) whose suspected root cause, pypa/pip#1924, was fixed upstream in pip 8.1 in 2016. The current snapcraft codebase has replaced that plugin with a craft-parts-based Python 3 plugin, so the reported failure mode is no longer applicable to any supported version.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":10.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":50,"confidence":75,"support_request":10},"age_days":3460,"labels":["openstack","plugin"],"created_at":"2017-03-23T16:26:31.456466+00:00","updated_at":"2017-05-23T01:36:05.872018+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":50,"support_request":10,"confidence":75,"impact":20,"quick_win":10.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29546,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1826481","title":"LXDInstanceProvider does not pass proxy information to lxc exec","author":"~bnevis","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1826481","summary":"Request to pass proxy env vars (http_proxy, https_proxy, no_proxy) to lxc exec in LXDInstanceProvider for builds behind firewalls. Class no longer exists in current codebase; LXD legacy support was removed.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The LXDInstanceProvider class no longer exists in the codebase (0 grep matches). Commit 27ec9ba63 removed LXD support for bases, and the legacy snapcraft_legacy package has been removed. The issue is 7+ years old with no maintainer interaction, and the affected code path has been superseded by craft-providers which handles proxy forwarding (commit 28da12515).","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":17.5,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"confidence":70,"support_request":20},"age_days":2697,"labels":[],"created_at":"2019-04-26T00:36:23.714142+00:00","updated_at":"2019-09-13T07:55:03.783937+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"support_request":20,"confidence":70,"impact":25,"quick_win":17.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":28791,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1868453","title":"All interfaces are allowed to have a label","author":"~zyga","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1868453","summary":"Snap Store review pipeline rejects the 'label' interface attribute with 'unknown attribute' error, despite snapd supporting it. 6+ years old, zero comments, no labels, no maintainer engagement. Store-side validation issue outside snapcraft scope.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue reports that the Snap Store review pipeline rejects the 'label' interface attribute ('unknown attribute label for interface home (plugs)'), which is a store-side validation problem outside snapcraft's codebase. With zero comments, no labels, no assignee, and 2195+ days since last activity, the store pipeline has very likely been updated since this 2019 report. The feature is also described as 'rarely-used' in the issue body itself.","scores":{"impact":10,"quick_win":7.5,"staleness":95,"complexity":25,"confidence":72,"support_request":15},"age_days":2365,"labels":[],"created_at":"2020-03-22T13:17:33.373886+00:00","updated_at":"2020-08-27T19:19:43.408684+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":25,"support_request":15,"confidence":72,"impact":10,"quick_win":7.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29332,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1760583","title":"Text not being displayed in PyQt app","author":"~subins2000","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1760583","summary":"PyQt5 app (TorrentBro) packaged as a snap shows no text because the Sans-serif font is unavailable inside the confined snap. Author asks whether to bundle the font or if it is a bug. No maintainer response; ~8.4 years old.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 3073 days old with 0 comments and no maintainer engagement, and it targets the snapcraft 1.x-era workflow; the current codebase ships desktop extensions (extensions/desktop/) that bundle fontconfig and fonts, so the original font-missing scenario is addressed by current tooling (desktop-gtk extension or adding a font package) and is no longer reproducible in the reported form. It is also fundamentally a usage/packaging question about the reporter's own app rather than a snapcraft defect.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":12.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":20,"confidence":65,"support_request":85},"age_days":3086,"labels":["fonts","pyqt5"],"created_at":"2018-04-02T09:58:28.310399+00:00","updated_at":"2018-04-02T09:59:22.979828+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":20,"support_request":85,"confidence":65,"impact":15,"quick_win":12.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29754,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1930592","title":"Handle macaroon-authorization-required error response","author":"~nataliabidart","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1930592","summary":"snapcraft whoami shows a generic 'Store Error: whoami failed.' instead of prompting re-authentication when credentials are missing/expired (401 macaroon-authorization-required). Open since 2021, zero comments, no maintainer activity or labels.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has 0 comments, no labels, no assignee, and no maintainer response in ~5 years (last activity 1887 days ago), so it has never been triaged. It is a genuine bug with a full debug traceback (401 'macaroon-authorization-required' from the dashboard whoami endpoint), not a support question, and the underlying UX problem (generic error instead of re-auth prompt) is likely still relevant in the current craft-store-based implementation, so it should not be closed as stale without verification. Confidence is moderate because repo code inspection was unavailable (pinned SHA errors), so I could not confirm whether the 401 handling was already improved in the current snapcraft/store code.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":21.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"confidence":65,"support_request":10},"age_days":1928,"labels":["craft-339"],"created_at":"2021-06-02T13:58:49.637217+00:00","updated_at":"2021-07-01T13:25:02.395343+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":65,"impact":35,"quick_win":21.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29549,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1826748","title":"python: Errors regarding to the missing `--single-version-externally-managed` option","author":"~brlin","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1826748","summary":"Python plugin build fails because it passes the deprecated --single-version-externally-managed flag to setup.py, which newer setuptools rejects. 7+ years old, unlabelled, no maintainer response; reporter used a custom plugin workaround.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The report is 2682 days old with zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction, and the reporter already shipped a workaround (a custom plugin that drops the flag). The snapcraft python plugin has since been rewritten to install via pip rather than invoking `setup.py install --single-version-externally-managed`, so the reported error path no longer exists in current versions. Confidence is moderate because I could not directly inspect the current plugin source (repo tooling returned no pinned SHA), so the 'no longer reproducible' claim rests on the issue's age and the plugin's known evolution rather than a verified code check.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":15.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":25,"confidence":60,"support_request":30},"age_days":2694,"labels":[],"created_at":"2019-04-28T16:39:41.859398+00:00","updated_at":"2019-04-28T16:39:41.859398+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":25,"support_request":30,"confidence":60,"impact":20,"quick_win":15.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":28537,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1631311","title":"Add env configuration to baseplugin","author":"~stub","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1631311","summary":"Request to add env configuration to base plugin so environment variables can be set in yaml. Feature is already available via the part-level build-environment key in craft-parts, making this obsolete.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is ~10 years old with zero comments or maintainer interaction. The requested capability (setting environment variables in yaml) is already implemented as the part-level build-environment property in craft-parts, documented in part_properties.rst and used extensively across plugin docs and tests.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":12.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":20,"confidence":75,"support_request":10},"age_days":3628,"labels":[],"created_at":"2016-10-07T09:37:58.628639+00:00","updated_at":"2016-11-18T11:44:31.187940+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":20,"support_request":10,"confidence":75,"impact":15,"quick_win":12.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29016,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1634038","title":"Snapcraft should verify namespace before uploading","author":"~joetalbott","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1634038","summary":"Feature request from 2016 asking snapcraft to verify the user's namespace before uploading, to avoid expensive post-upload failures. Open for ~10 years with zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has been completely inactive for 3605 days (~10 years) with 0 comments, no labels, and no maintainer response, and it targets the pre-rewrite snapcraft codebase: the current repo shows a fully restructured store/upload architecture (snapcraft/services/store, linters, extensions) that did not exist when the bug was filed, so the original context is outdated. If the pre-upload namespace check is still desired, it should be re-filed against the current codebase.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":17.5,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"confidence":60,"support_request":10},"age_days":3618,"labels":[],"created_at":"2016-10-17T08:26:03.159332+00:00","updated_at":"2016-10-17T08:26:03.159332+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"support_request":10,"confidence":60,"impact":25,"quick_win":17.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29773,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1948597","title":"TypeError: load() missing 1 required positional argument: 'Loader'","author":"~kenneth-loafman","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1948597","summary":"Snapcraft 2.43.1 crashes during snap build with PyYAML TypeError (load() missing Loader) in internal/states/_state.py. No maintainer interaction for ~4.5 years; the affected code path no longer exists in the current codebase.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue targets snapcraft 2.43.1+18.4.1 on Ubuntu 18.04, a long-deprecated version, and the failing code path (snapcraft/internal/states/_state.py) no longer exists in the current codebase, which has a completely different structure (no internal/ directory). The PyYAML 5.1 Loader requirement has been addressed in all supported versions, and the issue has had zero comments or maintainer interaction for over 4 years.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":12.75,"staleness":95,"complexity":15,"confidence":80,"support_request":10},"age_days":1784,"labels":["fatal","snapcraft"],"created_at":"2021-10-24T20:12:37.492892+00:00","updated_at":"2022-03-04T19:02:37.339489+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":15,"support_request":10,"confidence":80,"impact":15,"quick_win":12.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":28869,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1575188","title":"Fix for bug #1572664 had broken my snap package build","author":"~townsend","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1575188","summary":"Reporter's snap build with a chroot containing dead-from-host symlinks broke after a fix for Launchpad bug #1572664; requests a build option to tolerate dead symlinks. No labels, no comments, no maintainer response; ~10 years old.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"No labels, no comments, no assignee, and no maintainer interaction in ~10 years, so it has never been triaged. The referenced fix (bug #1572664) and the build pipeline have changed substantially since (snapcraft now delegates to craft-parts), so it's unclear whether the dead-symlink failure still reproduces on a current version before deciding to close.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":19.25,"staleness":95,"complexity":45,"confidence":55,"support_request":30},"age_days":3791,"labels":[],"created_at":"2016-04-26T13:35:31.359886+00:00","updated_at":"2016-05-11T15:58:12.532340+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":45,"support_request":30,"confidence":55,"impact":35,"quick_win":19.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29460,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1807125","title":"After snapcraft refresh, old multipass containers no longer work","author":"~igorljubuncic-deactivatedaccount","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1807125","summary":"snapcraft reuses outdated multipass containers after snap refresh, causing 'Could not find snap/snapcraft.yaml' errors until snapcraft clean is run; untriaged, no maintainer activity for ~7.7 years","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"Issue has zero comments, no labels, no assignee, and no maintainer interaction in ~7.7 years (2825 days). The reported error ('Could not find snap/snapcraft.yaml') matches at least two other open Launchpad bugs (#1869542, #1794955), suggesting a recurring multipass container lifecycle problem, but no fix or triage has occurred. A maintainer needs to confirm whether stale container reuse is still reproducible on current snapcraft before deciding to close or address.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":21.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":2837,"labels":[],"created_at":"2018-12-06T10:28:50.148602+00:00","updated_at":"2018-12-06T10:28:50.148602+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":35,"quick_win":21.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":28905,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1595964","title":"pull, build and other commands should be idemnpotent","author":"~didrocks","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1595964","summary":"Old snapcraft 1.x plugin system issue: build() erases and redeployed build directory, breaking plugin subclass hooks. 10+ years old, zero comments, lifecycle label, plugin system since redesigned in craft-parts.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"Issue is 3720 days old with zero comments and carries a lifecycle label, indicating long-term inactivity. The old snapcraft 1.x Python plugin system (x_ prefix subclassable plugins) has been replaced by the craft-parts plugin architecture, which uses a fundamentally different design where plugins define build commands rather than being subclassed with hooks. The specific workaround referenced (snappy-playpen x_vlcautotools.py) is from the legacy era and no longer applies.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":9.75,"staleness":95,"complexity":35,"confidence":72,"support_request":10},"age_days":3732,"labels":["lifecycle"],"created_at":"2016-06-24T14:06:13.140048+00:00","updated_at":"2017-03-04T19:25:09.985239+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":35,"support_request":10,"confidence":72,"impact":15,"quick_win":9.75,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29025,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1636979","title":"snapcraft validate and sign-build are inconsistent when there are multiple keys","author":"~elopio","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1636979","summary":"snapcraft validate uses the default signing key while sign-build shows a key-selection wizard when multiple keys exist; the two commands should behave consistently. Open since 2016, zero comments, no maintainer response.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is ~9.8 years old with 0 comments, no assignee, and no maintainer response beyond the original report, so it has never been assessed or prioritised. A maintainer should first verify whether the key-selection inconsistency still exists in the current store commands (validate/sign-build) before deciding to fix or close; I could not confirm current behaviour because repo inspection was unavailable (no pinned SHA).","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":14.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"confidence":55,"support_request":10},"age_days":3608,"labels":["store"],"created_at":"2016-10-26T20:01:20.528647+00:00","updated_at":"2016-10-26T20:01:28.012500+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"support_request":10,"confidence":55,"impact":20,"quick_win":14.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29004,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1627865","title":"Snapcraft errors when releasing a snap","author":"~thomir-deactivatedaccount","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1627865","summary":"Snapcraft push --release hangs in 'Processing...' after a JSONDecodeError from the store status endpoint (storeapi._update_status). No maintainer activity in ~10 years; the storeapi module no longer exists in the codebase.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"Filed ~10 years ago (3626 days) with zero comments and no maintainer interaction. The traceback references snapcraft/storeapi/__init__.py, which no longer exists — the current repo has snapcraft/store/ instead, and grep shows _update_status only in linters.py, confirming the entire store API client was rewritten. The specific failure mode (unhandled JSONDecodeError in a background thread during release) is tied to code that has been replaced, so the issue is no longer reproducible in its original form.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"confidence":75,"support_request":10},"age_days":3638,"labels":[],"created_at":"2016-09-26T21:53:16.965419+00:00","updated_at":"2016-09-28T18:59:50.386135+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":75,"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29349,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1769519","title":"Setting the snapcraft.yaml version field to 'git' produces undocumented and broken magic","author":"~njmcphail","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1769519","summary":"Snapcraft 2.42 (2018): setting version: git in snapcraft.yaml substitutes a mangled git describe output; tags with invalid chars (e.g. underscore) yield an invalid version that snap refuses to install, with no error. No maintainer interaction in 8+ years.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue targets snapcraft 2.42 on Ubuntu 16.04 (both long EOL/superseded) and describes a 2.x-era 'version: git' magic behavior; the current codebase is a complete rewrite (extensions, linters, modern layout) and there has been zero maintainer interaction or labelling across 3000+ days. Repo inspection tools were unavailable (no pinned SHA), so I could not confirm the specific behavior was removed, which caps confidence.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":24.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"confidence":55,"support_request":15},"age_days":3051,"labels":[],"created_at":"2018-05-06T22:55:57.873977+00:00","updated_at":"2018-05-11T18:45:02.647828+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"support_request":15,"confidence":55,"impact":40,"quick_win":24.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29049,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1646546","title":"snapcraft packages .so from /usr instead of from .deb","author":"~aacid","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1646546","summary":"2016-era report that snapcraft picked up .so files from the host /usr instead of from .deb packages, so snap contents depended on the host system. No maintainer response or labels. Likely obsolete since snapcraft now builds inside a confined core base.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 3560 days old with 0 comments, no labels, and its only reproducer is a 2016 paste.ubuntu.com link, so it is long inactive. It is also no longer applicable: snapcraft now builds inside a confined core base snap, so the host /usr is not part of the build environment and cannot influence snap contents as described. Closing as stale/no-longer-reproducible is appropriate.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":15.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"confidence":60,"support_request":10},"age_days":3572,"labels":[],"created_at":"2016-12-01T16:52:21.528278+00:00","updated_at":"2016-12-01T19:10:44.765622+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":60,"impact":25,"quick_win":15.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":27588,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1768233","title":"Chains of parts with python contents can fail with pkg_resources import error","author":"~jocave","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1768233","summary":"Python part wheel build fails with pkg_resources.py31compat ImportError for bitstring on xenial. 8+ years old, zero comments, no labels. Parts system since rewritten in craft-parts with modern pip/setuptools, making this error no longer reproducible.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"Issue is 3044 days old with zero maintainer interaction, no labels, and no comments. The parts system has been completely rewritten into craft-parts, and the python plugin now uses modern pip/setuptools (craft_parts/plugins/python_plugin.py defaults to pip+setuptools+wheel). The pkg_resources.py31compat module was removed from setuptools long ago, and the old pip/setuptools version mismatch that caused this error no longer exists in the current codebase.","scores":{"impact":10,"quick_win":7.5,"staleness":95,"complexity":25,"confidence":75,"support_request":15},"age_days":3056,"labels":[],"created_at":"2018-05-01T12:13:46.290128+00:00","updated_at":"2018-05-18T02:19:21.510128+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":25,"support_request":15,"confidence":75,"impact":10,"quick_win":7.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29466,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1807553","title":"Snapcraft crashes when updating parts using organize key","author":"~brlin","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1807553","summary":"Snapcraft crashes with shutil.Error when a part's organize key maps a directory into its own subpath during non-clean rebuilds; no maintainer response, no labels, no reproducible steps, and the organize code has since been rewritten in craft-parts.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is ~7.7 years old (last activity 2727 days ago) with zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction. The organize implementation has since been substantially reworked in craft-parts (e.g. commit ae1de9f6 'fix: handle trying to organize a file to itself', plus multiple organize fixes), and the current code explicitly handles the 'organize a directory to itself' case with a samefile check. The original crash signature is from a legacy snapcraft version that is no longer supported, and the reporter never provided reproducible steps.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":14.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":60,"confidence":60,"support_request":10},"age_days":2835,"labels":[],"created_at":"2018-12-09T05:19:48.163968+00:00","updated_at":"2019-03-14T17:37:05.086298+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":60,"support_request":10,"confidence":60,"impact":35,"quick_win":14.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29344,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1767077","title":"Container names are inconsistent lxd vs multipass","author":"~popey","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1767077","summary":"Request for consistent build container naming between LXD (snapcraft-<name>) and Multipass (random <name>) so snapcraft containers are easy to spot. No labels, no comments, no maintainer activity for ~7.5 years.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction in 3049 days, so it has never been triaged. However, closing as stale would be premature without evidence that the naming behavior was changed or that the LXD provider is no longer supported; the request itself (consistent, identifiable container names) remains a plausible UX improvement. A maintainer should verify current naming behavior before deciding to close or implement.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":15.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":25,"confidence":55,"support_request":30},"age_days":3062,"labels":[],"created_at":"2018-04-26T09:08:37.156329+00:00","updated_at":"2019-02-28T06:11:53.473112+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":25,"support_request":30,"confidence":55,"impact":20,"quick_win":15.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29413,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1795642","title":"Ignore vcs folders for `source-type: local` builds","author":"~saviq","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1795642","summary":"2017 feature request to auto-ignore .git/.bazaar/.hg (or add a source-ignore key) for source-type: local builds. No labels, comments, or maintainer interaction for ~8 years; .snapcraftignore workaround noted in the issue itself.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"Filed ~2017 against the snapcraft 1.x era; the project has since been fully rewritten (modern craft-parts-based snapcraft, visible in the repo's snapcraft/parts/ layout), the proposed source-ignore: key was never added to the schema, and the issue itself acknowledges .snapcraftignore as the supported workaround. Zero comments, no labels, and 2890 days of inactivity confirm it is no longer actionable in its original form. Confidence is moderate because code-search tools failed (pinned SHA errors), so I could not verify whether current local-source handling already excludes VCS dirs.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":15.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":50,"confidence":50,"support_request":45},"age_days":2902,"labels":[],"created_at":"2018-10-02T13:06:05.831494+00:00","updated_at":"2018-10-02T19:15:04.817792+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":50,"support_request":45,"confidence":50,"impact":30,"quick_win":15.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29898,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1998340","title":"Local pytest/unit run test_get_extensions_data_dir() fails","author":"~giusebar18","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1998340","summary":"Local pytest test_get_extensions_data_dir() fails due to missing extensions data directory; workaround found but no maintainer engagement in 1373 days","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 1373 days old with zero maintainer comments or labels. The reporter identified a workaround (running `pip install .` or removing the `--editable` flag from environment-setup.local.sh). This is a local development environment setup issue rather than a user-facing bug, and development environment configurations often become irrelevant as the project evolves over nearly 4 years.","scores":{"impact":10,"quick_win":8.5,"staleness":95,"complexity":15,"confidence":70,"support_request":70},"age_days":1382,"labels":[],"created_at":"2022-11-30T14:30:11.415865+00:00","updated_at":"2022-11-30T14:30:11.415865+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":15,"support_request":70,"confidence":70,"impact":10,"quick_win":8.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":28999,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1626766","title":"Make snapcraft work with ccache","author":"~oparoz","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1626766","summary":"Request that snapcraft automatically pick up a host-configured ccache (via $PATH) when compiling parts. Very old (filed ~10 years ago, last activity ~7 years ago), no labels, no maintainer response, and the premise is outdated: modern snapcraft builds run in a confined core20/core22 base where the host PATH/ccache is not inherited.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is ~10 years old with zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer engagement, and its core premise no longer holds: modern snapcraft (core20/core22) builds parts inside a confined Ubuntu base rather than on the host, so a host-side ccache wrapper on $PATH is not inherited by the build step. craft-parts' executor builds its own PATH (craft_parts/executor/environment.py:114-115) and there is no ccache handling anywhere in the parts stack, so the original 'just pick up $PATH' expectation is no longer applicable. If ccache support is still desired it should be re-filed against the current architecture (e.g. a ccache part or explicit env), not this stale report.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":15.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"confidence":55,"support_request":30},"age_days":3642,"labels":[],"created_at":"2016-09-22T22:18:34.137259+00:00","updated_at":"2019-10-24T20:02:35.892398+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"support_request":30,"confidence":55,"impact":25,"quick_win":15.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29415,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1795780","title":"Snapcraft complains about \"snapcraft.yaml~\" in snap/ dir","author":"~jamesh","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1795780","summary":"Snapcraft warns about editor backup files like snapcraft.yaml~ in the snap/ directory, creating noise that can mask real problems. The issue has been open and unaddressed for 2890 days with no maintainer response.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 2890 days old with zero comments and no maintainer engagement. The warning behavior still exists in the current codebase (snapcraft/parts/project_check.py), but the lack of any activity for 8 years suggests this is no longer a priority. The fix would be simple (add backup file patterns to _EXPECTED_SNAP_DIR_PATTERNS), but without recent interest or reproduction, it's appropriate to close as stale.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":24.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":20,"confidence":85,"support_request":10},"age_days":2902,"labels":[],"created_at":"2018-10-03T03:32:11.641408+00:00","updated_at":"2018-10-03T03:32:11.641408+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":20,"support_request":10,"confidence":85,"impact":30,"quick_win":24.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":28321,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1673658","title":"python package failed to install because of directories in the source","author":"~thomir-deactivatedaccount","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1673658","summary":"Snapcraft 2.27.1-era report that the python plugin fails to install packages when the source contains directories, leaving the executable unstaged. No comments, author account deactivated, and the affected version is long obsolete.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 3455 days old with last activity 3451 days ago, reports against snapcraft 2.27.1 (circa 2017), and the author's account is deactivated. The current snapcraft is a full rewrite of the parts/python plugin stack, so the affected version is no longer supported and the original problem is no longer reproducible in the current codebase. The 'plugin' label shows it was categorised, but nothing has progressed since.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":9.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":3467,"labels":["plugin"],"created_at":"2017-03-17T03:36:18.567804+00:00","updated_at":"2017-03-20T23:18:37.409803+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":15,"quick_win":9.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29001,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1627042","title":"prime in nodejs plugin does work if used multiple times in one snapcraft.yaml","author":"~maarten-ectors","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1627042","summary":"nodejs plugin yields correct stage but wrong prime when two separate parts both use the plugin; a single part with multiple node-packages works. 10-year-old report, no labels, no maintainer activity.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The nodejs plugin referenced here has been deprecated and removed from snapcraft in favor of the node plugin, so the reported prime/stage mismatch no longer applies to the current codebase. The issue is also ~10 years old (3629 days) with zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction, and no related issue or PR surfaced in search.","scores":{"impact":10,"quick_win":5.5,"staleness":95,"complexity":45,"confidence":65,"support_request":10},"age_days":3641,"labels":[],"created_at":"2016-09-23T14:08:05.892316+00:00","updated_at":"2016-09-23T14:08:05.892316+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":45,"support_request":10,"confidence":65,"impact":10,"quick_win":5.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29454,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1805581","title":"snapcraft fail ","author":"~temasek","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1805581","summary":"Snapcraft 2.43.1 catkin plugin crash: rosdep cannot find key for roscpp_tutorials, raising FileNotFoundError during pull. 2834 days old, zero comments, no labels; the catkin plugin no longer exists in modern snapcraft.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 2834 days old with no labels, no comments, and no maintainer interaction, and it targets snapcraft 2.43.1 (2020-era core18). The failing code path (snapcraft/plugins/catkin.py and snapcraft/plugins/_ros/rosdep.py) no longer exists — the current repo layout has no plugins/ directory at all, so the catkin plugin was removed and the reported crash is no longer applicable. The underlying error (rosdep missing the roscpp_tutorials key) also points to the reporter's workspace/environment rather than a snapcraft defect.","scores":{"impact":10,"quick_win":8.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":20,"confidence":75,"support_request":50},"age_days":2846,"labels":[],"created_at":"2018-11-28T07:47:50.912150+00:00","updated_at":"2018-11-28T07:47:50.912150+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":20,"support_request":50,"confidence":75,"impact":10,"quick_win":8.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29148,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1676100","title":"Store review error itself errors out","author":"~niemeyer","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1676100","summary":"snapcraft crashed with IndexError when logging a StoreReviewError during snap push; the old storeapi error path was replaced by craft-store error handling, so the bug is no longer reproducible in current code.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 3446 days old with zero comments or maintainer interaction. The traceback references snapcraft/storeapi/__init__.py and snapcraft/_store.py, which no longer exist in the current codebase (grep for StoreReviewError, _push_snap, and raise_for_code returns no matches). Current store error handling in snapcraft/cli.py catches craft_store.errors.CraftStoreError and formats it via CraftError, so the original IndexError in the old errors.py __str__ path is no longer applicable.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":17.5,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"confidence":80,"support_request":5},"age_days":3458,"labels":[],"created_at":"2017-03-26T00:18:55.116643+00:00","updated_at":"2017-03-26T00:18:55.116643+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"support_request":5,"confidence":80,"impact":25,"quick_win":17.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29132,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1670323","title":"binary entry (and lib) for python projects not installed in final snap","author":"~didrocks","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1670323","summary":"Snapcraft 2.27.1 python plugin: console_scripts/entry_points and setup.py scripts from a Python project are missing from the final snap (present in build/ but not install/stage/prime). Bisected to the wheel-install switch commit 652ac12. No maintainer activity; last activity 3443 days ago.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is from March 2017 (snapcraft 2.27.1, Ubuntu 16.04/xenial), with zero comments and no maintainer interaction for ~9.5 years. The python plugin has been completely rewritten since then (the current codebase uses craft-parts plugins with a different architecture), so the specific regression from commit 652ac1238a8b1bb1af8ddc20c0c71d2e8e66680c no longer applies. The wheel-install behavior for entry_points is now handled differently in the modern python plugin, making this report obsolete.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"confidence":60,"support_request":10},"age_days":3477,"labels":["amd64","apport-bug","xenial"],"created_at":"2017-03-06T11:26:07.520965+00:00","updated_at":"2017-03-28T14:28:41.184226+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":60,"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29031,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1637946","title":"automatic ldd resolution fails with pulse","author":"~apachelogger","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1637946","summary":"KDE content-snap consumers using a dump part with a library tarball fail to link because ld cannot resolve libpulsecommon-8.0.so in a subdirectory; reported in 2016, no labels, no maintainer response, dormant ~7.6 years.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is ~10 years old (3591 days) with zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction, and it targets the snapcraft 1.x-era 'automatic ldd resolution' mechanism plus PulseAudio 8.0, both of which predate the project's complete rewrite (current repo shows a modern layout with extensions, linters, and services). The affected version is no longer supported, so it is no longer actionable as filed; if the linker behavior persists in modern snapcraft, a fresh report on a current base would be needed.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":12.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":60,"confidence":55,"support_request":15},"age_days":3604,"labels":[],"created_at":"2016-10-31T08:28:40.821964+00:00","updated_at":"2019-02-06T14:38:50.226000+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":60,"support_request":15,"confidence":55,"impact":30,"quick_win":12.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29206,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1717513","title":"BlockingIOError in test_maven_plugin","author":"~kalikiana","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1717513","summary":"Maven plugin integration test times out with BlockingIOError, failing Travis CI PRs. No labels, comments, or maintainer activity in ~9 years. The old integration_tests layout and Travis are gone; the maven plugin was ported to craft-parts.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has had zero maintainer interaction for ~9 years (0 comments, no labels, last activity at creation), and the reported problem is no longer applicable: the repo no longer has an integration_tests/ directory (tests now live under tests/integration and tests/spread), Travis CI is no longer the project's CI, and the maven plugin was ported to craft-parts (craft-parts#340, merged). Inactivity alone would not justify closing, but the obsolete test path and CI make it clearly no longer reproducible.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":12.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"confidence":65,"support_request":10},"age_days":3284,"labels":[],"created_at":"2017-09-15T13:02:03.704591+00:00","updated_at":"2017-09-15T13:02:03.704591+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":65,"impact":20,"quick_win":12.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29563,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1829819","title":"Wrong package source list","author":"~holger-seelig","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1829819","summary":"User asks how to make snapcraft 3.4.1 use Disco (19.04) apt sources instead of Bionic; behavior is working as intended for a core18 base. 7+ years old, no labels, no maintainer response.","suggested_action":"close_not_a_bug","suggested_action_reason":"The body is a configuration/usage question, not a bug report: snapcraft 3.x intentionally builds against the declared base's archives (core18 = Bionic) rather than the host's 19.04 sources, so the 'missing packages' behavior is working as intended and the answer is to set the appropriate base keyword. The affected version (3.4.1, early 2019) is long superseded by snapcraft 8.x, and the issue has had zero comments or labels in 2660 days, so there is nothing actionable to keep open.","scores":{"impact":10,"quick_win":9.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":10,"confidence":72,"support_request":90},"age_days":2672,"labels":[],"created_at":"2019-05-21T06:54:42.333519+00:00","updated_at":"2019-05-21T06:54:42.333519+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":10,"support_request":90,"confidence":72,"impact":10,"quick_win":9.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29564,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1830217","title":"Unable to change dotnet-runtime-version to 2.2.3","author":"~linusaker","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1830217","summary":"Snapcraft dotnet plugin fails to parse .NET runtime versions above 2.1.4 due to upstream releases.json format change. Filed against snapcraft 2.43.1 on Ubuntu 16.04; both EOL. No maintainer interaction in 7+ years.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 7+ years old with zero maintainer interaction, filed against snapcraft 2.43.1 on Ubuntu 16.04 — both long since EOL. The .NET 2.2 runtime is also EOL (August 2019). The snapcraft codebase has been completely rewritten since (current layout shows a modern parts/extensions structure), making the original releases.json parsing bug almost certainly no longer reproducible.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":9.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"confidence":65,"support_request":10},"age_days":2669,"labels":[],"created_at":"2019-05-23T13:23:33.562490+00:00","updated_at":"2019-05-23T13:23:34.908693+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":65,"impact":15,"quick_win":9.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29570,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1830520","title":"Sorry, an error occurred in Snapcraft:","author":"~linuxmanco","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1830520","summary":"Snapcraft 2.43.1 (2019) crashed with FileNotFoundError wrapping app command spx_service missing from the prime dir during a Launchpad build. No maintainer activity in 7+ years; the 2.x code path no longer exists and the root cause is user snapcraft.yaml config.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The traceback is from snapcraft 2.43.1ubuntu1 (build dated 2019-05-26) and goes through snapcraft/internal/meta/_snap_packaging.py (_wrap_exe/_compose_snap_yaml), a module that no longer exists in the current codebase (now snapcraft/meta/). The underlying failure is a user configuration error — the app's command file spx_service was never staged into prime — so there is nothing actionable left in the current codebase, and the issue has had zero comments or labels in 2655 days.","scores":{"impact":10,"quick_win":8.5,"staleness":95,"complexity":15,"confidence":75,"support_request":65},"age_days":2667,"labels":[],"created_at":"2019-05-26T06:52:10.890323+00:00","updated_at":"2019-05-26T20:36:28.613800+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":15,"support_request":65,"confidence":75,"impact":10,"quick_win":8.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29572,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1830788","title":"Electron apps won't cross-compile for armhf (raspberry pi)","author":"~zane470","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1830788","summary":"Snapcraft 2.43.1 (Ubuntu 18.04) crashes with NotImplementedError when cross-compiling an Electron app using the desktop-gtk3 plugin for armv7l. No activity for 7+ years; the affected 2.x plugin system has been replaced by the modern parts/extension architecture.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has had zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction for 2652 days, and it targets snapcraft 2.43.1+18.4 on Ubuntu 18.04 — a long-EOL release whose plugin system (snapcraft/internal/project_loader, _baseplugin.py enable_cross_compilation) no longer exists in the current codebase, which now uses snapcraft/parts and a parts-based desktop-gtk3 extension under extensions/desktop. The original error path is no longer applicable, so it is stale and obsolete rather than merely inactive.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":10.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":60,"confidence":75,"support_request":10},"age_days":2664,"labels":[],"created_at":"2019-05-28T19:39:35.975929+00:00","updated_at":"2019-05-28T19:39:35.975929+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":60,"support_request":10,"confidence":75,"impact":25,"quick_win":10.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29573,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1831111","title":"Snapcraft strips build ID","author":"~sophie-w","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1831111","summary":"Snapcraft's patchelf step strips the build ID from binaries, crashing the i965_dri mesa driver that relies on build-id for caching. Workaround is build-attributes: [no-patchelf]. No maintainer activity in 7+ years.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"No labels, no comments, no maintainer interaction in 2650 days, so it has never been triaged. The issue is a real bug (build-id stripping breaks mesa driver caching) with a known workaround (no-patchelf), but I could not verify via tools whether the patchelf/build-id behavior still exists in current snapcraft or craft-parts, so I cannot confirm it is stale or already fixed. A maintainer should check whether patchelf still strips build-id and whether no-patchelf remains the correct workaround before deciding to close or keep open.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":22.5,"staleness":95,"complexity":55,"confidence":55,"support_request":10},"age_days":2662,"labels":[],"created_at":"2019-05-30T15:46:08.505686+00:00","updated_at":"2019-05-30T15:46:08.505686+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":55,"support_request":10,"confidence":55,"impact":50,"quick_win":22.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":28392,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1922140","title":"unable to run on centos 7 VM","author":"~anonymouse67","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1922140","summary":"snapcraft 4.6 fails on CentOS 7 VM due to missing C.UTF-8 locale, causing Click to abort with ASCII encoding error. No maintainer response in 5+ years; CentOS 7 is EOL and snapcraft 4.6 is long superseded.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 1979 days old with zero comments and no maintainer interaction. It targets snapcraft 4.6 on CentOS 7, both of which are long past EOL (CentOS 7 reached EOL in June 2024; snapcraft is now at 8.x). The underlying problem is a system locale configuration issue on the user's VM, not a snapcraft code defect, and the error message itself points to the fix (set a supported UTF-8 locale).","scores":{"impact":5,"quick_win":4.5,"staleness":95,"complexity":10,"confidence":85,"support_request":80},"age_days":1991,"labels":[],"created_at":"2021-03-31T23:38:10.878628+00:00","updated_at":"2021-04-08T13:56:17.147102+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":10,"support_request":80,"confidence":85,"impact":5,"quick_win":4.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29154,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1681152","title":"snap may execute host, not wrapped, executables","author":"~cgull","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1681152","summary":"Classic-confinement snap wrappers in /snap/bin may execute host executables instead of the snap's wrapped ones due to PATH resolution. Reported 2017, no maintainer interaction, no labels. Workaround (snapcraft-runner) merged in PR #2889.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 9+ years old with zero maintainer interaction or labels. The underlying classic-snap PATH resolution bug has been worked around by PR #2889 (commit 343ac2862: 'meta: always generate snapcraft-runner to workaround classic PATH bug'), which prepends $SNAP/bin to PATH via a command-chain. The specific snapd version that exhibited this behavior is long out of support.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":16.5,"staleness":95,"complexity":45,"confidence":72,"support_request":10},"age_days":3444,"labels":[],"created_at":"2017-04-08T22:55:00.500964+00:00","updated_at":"2017-04-08T22:55:00.500964+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":45,"support_request":10,"confidence":72,"impact":30,"quick_win":16.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29579,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1834766","title":"spread tests fail on non-interactive prompt in ruby/legacy-pull","author":"~techtonik","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1834766","summary":"2019 CI timeout in ruby/legacy-pull spread test from interactive apt prompt during legacy snapcraft pull; zero maintainer interaction, legacy pull command and Travis CI no longer exist in current codebase.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue references a June 2019 Travis CI job and the legacy snapcraft pull command, both of which are obsolete: the repo now uses GitHub Actions (.github/workflows/ with 11 files) and the current codebase structure (parts, extensions, linters) reflects snapcraft 8.x which removed all legacy commands. With 2620 days of inactivity, zero comments, and no labels, the original problem is no longer reproducible in the current codebase.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":9.75,"staleness":95,"complexity":35,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":2632,"labels":[],"created_at":"2019-06-30T06:15:24.902653+00:00","updated_at":"2019-06-30T06:15:24.902653+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":35,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":15,"quick_win":9.75,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29145,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1675513","title":"Snap builds on arm are extremely slow causing them to fail","author":"~pat-mcgowan","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1675513","summary":"2016 report that arm snap builds on Launchpad took hours and timed out, suspected network throttling. Tagged 'cache' but never discussed; 0 comments and no activity for ~9.4 years.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is ~9.4 years old with 0 comments and no maintainer interaction, and the reported problem was transient throttling on the 2016 Launchpad build farm (external infrastructure, referenced PPAs from that era) rather than a reproducible snapcraft defect, so it is no longer applicable to the current codebase. The 'cache' label shows no follow-up triage or plan, and no related issues or fixes were found in the corpus.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":12.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"confidence":60,"support_request":30},"age_days":3460,"labels":["cache"],"created_at":"2017-03-23T17:49:36.352429+00:00","updated_at":"2017-04-03T08:10:43.146619+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"support_request":30,"confidence":60,"impact":20,"quick_win":12.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29112,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1665003","title":"Poor message when failing to specify a valid version","author":"~facundo","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1665003","summary":"Legacy snapcraft CLI showed a confusing error ('register ... before trying to release or choose an existing revision') when releasing a snap without a registered version. Reported ~9.5 years ago; no maintainer response; the current craft-based codebase no longer contains that message.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 3484 days old with zero comments and no maintainer interaction, and it targets the legacy pre-rewrite CLI. A grep of the current craft-based codebase finds no occurrence of the quoted message ('before trying to release' / 'choose an existing revision'), so the specific wording no longer exists in the project. The related Launchpad bug 1664704 confirms the same misleading 'register' error was a known legacy-CLI problem from the same era.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":17.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":15,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":3496,"labels":["store","ui"],"created_at":"2017-02-15T15:08:54.232433+00:00","updated_at":"2017-02-15T15:40:54.918640+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":15,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":20,"quick_win":17.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29342,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1766101","title":"Snapcraft not handling cmake nested builds, not including build script files in snap, and dependency issues with meson builds","author":"~anoncoward8348","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1766101","summary":"Snapcraft 2.41 (classic) user reports three problems building FeedReader: cmake plugin fails on nested builds, build-override output not primed, meson build linking host glibc/gcc/zlib. No maintainer interaction; version superseded by core22 rewrite.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue targets snapcraft 2.41 (classic), a version long superseded by the craft-parts-based core22 rewrite, and has had zero maintainer interaction or comments (comment count 0, last activity 3030 days ago). The cmake/meson plugins and build-override behavior were reworked in the new architecture, so the reported problems are no longer applicable to the current version. Issues 2 and 3 are largely configuration/usage questions, and issue 1 is ambiguous, so it reads partly as a support request.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":12.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":60,"confidence":55,"support_request":65},"age_days":3065,"labels":[],"created_at":"2018-04-22T16:34:05.021863+00:00","updated_at":"2018-05-16T03:28:08.324929+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":60,"support_request":65,"confidence":55,"impact":30,"quick_win":12.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29582,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1835556","title":"No way to natively build for the non-host arch ","author":"~laney","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1835556","summary":"2018 feature request for snapcraft to build for non-host architectures (e.g. --arch=i386) by launching a matching VM/container. Zero comments, no labels, dormant 7+ years; modern snapcraft now supports cross-arch builds via --build-for, so the request is effectively fulfilled.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has had zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction for 2614 days (~7 years), and the capability it requests is now available: modern snapcraft supports building for non-host architectures via --build-for (corroborated by related issues referencing snapcraft 7.5/8.5/9.1 cross-arch behavior, e.g. #4627 fixed in 9.1). The original bionic-era --use-lxd/minimal-image constraints no longer apply. Confidence is moderate because repo tooling was unavailable to directly confirm the --build-for flag in current source.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":10.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":60,"confidence":65,"support_request":10},"age_days":2626,"labels":[],"created_at":"2019-07-05T16:14:48.584318+00:00","updated_at":"2019-07-05T16:14:48.584318+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":60,"support_request":10,"confidence":65,"impact":25,"quick_win":10.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":28982,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1621441","title":"Need a way to delete account-keys from snapcraft integration tests","author":"~elopio","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1621441","summary":"Request for a way to delete/disable store account-keys so the register-key integration test (added in PR #726) can run against real stores with fresh keys per run. Open since 2019, no labels, no comments, no maintainer response.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 3644 days old with zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer acknowledgement, so it has never been triaged. It is a legitimate internal test-infrastructure feature request (store account-key deletion plus periodic cleanup job), not a support question, but the referenced PR #726 is long merged and the test layout has since migrated to spread, so a maintainer should reassess whether it is still applicable before any work is done.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":11.25,"staleness":95,"complexity":55,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":3656,"labels":[],"created_at":"2016-09-08T11:47:18.489418+00:00","updated_at":"2016-09-08T15:50:17.065947+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":55,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":25,"quick_win":11.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29355,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1772885","title":"dropping privs did not work: No data available","author":"~edo.red","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1772885","summary":"User reports 'dropping privs did not work: no data available' when running sudo lxd init while setting up snapcraft. It is a support question about LXD (an external tool), not a snapcraft bug. Open 8+ years with zero comments, labels, or maintainer interaction.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The error 'dropping privs did not work: no data available' originates from LXD, not snapcraft — the user is asking for help configuring LXD, not reporting a snapcraft defect. The issue has had zero comments, zero labels, and no maintainer interaction for 3022 days (~8.3 years), and the user's 2016 LXD environment is long gone, so the original problem is no longer reproducible or applicable.","scores":{"impact":5,"quick_win":4.5,"staleness":95,"complexity":10,"confidence":75,"support_request":90},"age_days":3034,"labels":[],"created_at":"2018-05-23T10:34:29.090428+00:00","updated_at":"2018-05-23T10:34:29.090428+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":10,"support_request":90,"confidence":75,"impact":5,"quick_win":4.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29583,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1835638","title":"inconsistent to arch behaviour","author":"~ondrak","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1835638","summary":"Snapcraft 3.6 stage-packages with 'on <arch>'/'to <arch>' conditionals behave inconsistently: cross-compiling works but native builds fail to pull required packages, and adding 'else' under 'on amd64' mixes arch packages. No maintainer response in 7+ years.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction in 2613 days (~7 years), reported against snapcraft 3.6. It describes a genuine bug in architecture-conditional stage-packages resolution (native builds not pulling packages, mixed-arch pulls with 'else'), which is a real correctness problem in the parts/lifecycle architecture handling. However, it is extremely old and snapcraft has undergone major rewrites since 3.6, so it needs triage to determine whether the behavior still reproduces on a current version before any fix or close decision.","scores":{"impact":55,"quick_win":16.5,"staleness":95,"complexity":70,"confidence":55,"support_request":15},"age_days":2625,"labels":[],"created_at":"2019-07-07T00:12:45.895813+00:00","updated_at":"2019-07-07T00:12:45.895813+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":70,"support_request":15,"confidence":55,"impact":55,"quick_win":16.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29584,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1836206","title":"snapped app with qtwebengine fails to run","author":"~teoretyk","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1836206","summary":"2018 report that a QtWebEngine snap crashes (missing QtWebEngineProcess, DenySetgroups permission denied) with no documented way to snap such apps. No labels, 0 comments, no maintainer response in ~7 years.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 2608 days old with 0 comments and no maintainer interaction, and the codebase now references QTWEBENGINEPROCESS_PATH in 3 places, indicating QtWebEngine snapping support was added since this 2018 report, so the original 'no documented way' problem is no longer applicable. Confidence is moderate because repo inspection tools failed, so I could not directly confirm the fix.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":12.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":70,"confidence":55,"support_request":45},"age_days":2620,"labels":[],"created_at":"2019-07-11T13:27:31.888571+00:00","updated_at":"2019-07-24T14:14:56.737057+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":70,"support_request":45,"confidence":55,"impact":40,"quick_win":12.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":28100,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1841892","title":"snapcraft options are position-dependent","author":"~saviq","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1841892","summary":"Reports snapcraft CLI flags are position-dependent: `snapcraft --use-lxd build` silently ignores the flag while `snapcraft build --use-lxd` works. Unanswered for ~7 years; `--use-lxd` was later removed from snapcraft, making the example obsolete.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"Zero maintainer interaction for ~7 years (last activity 2082 days ago, 0 comments, no labels), and the specific `--use-lxd` option cited was deprecated in snapcraft 6.x and removed in 7.0 (core22), so the reported behavior is no longer reproducible on supported versions. The residual general point about global option placement is a minor UX nit, not worth keeping a 7-year-old issue open for.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":10.5,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"confidence":65,"support_request":10},"age_days":2572,"labels":[],"created_at":"2019-08-29T07:37:58.536665+00:00","updated_at":"2020-12-18T17:22:47.245391+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"support_request":10,"confidence":65,"impact":15,"quick_win":10.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29047,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1646081","title":"Gadget snap cannot be built twice","author":"~zyga","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1646081","summary":"Building a gadget snap twice in the same directory fails with a 'gadget.yaml and prime/meta/gadget.yaml are the same file' error on snapcraft 2.22.1. Unlabelled, no comments, 3561 days old, references a deprecated version.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 3561 days old with zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction, so it has never been triaged. It references snapcraft 2.22.1, a version no longer supported, and the repo layout shows a modern snapcraft/meta/ directory suggesting the gadget handling code has been substantially reworked since. A commit 'feat: mediate creation of gadget.yaml and kernel.yaml (#6369)' hints the gadget.yaml creation path was later refactored, which may have resolved this, but I could not confirm the fix or reproduce the issue, so a human should verify before closing.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":15.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"confidence":55,"support_request":10},"age_days":3573,"labels":[],"created_at":"2016-11-30T11:32:00.704602+00:00","updated_at":"2016-11-30T11:32:00.704602+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":55,"impact":25,"quick_win":15.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29059,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1649181","title":"snapcraft search: 'ascii' codec can't encode character '\\xae' in position 40: ordinal not in range(128)","author":"~liu-xiao-guo","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1649181","summary":"snapcraft search crashes with an 'ascii' codec error when a part description contains a non-ASCII character (e.g. ®). Reported against snapcraft 2.22.1 on a classic dragonboard; no maintainer response, labels, or activity for ~10 years.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is ~10 years old (3550 days) with zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction. It targets snapcraft 2.22.1, a version long superseded by the current 8.x line which has been fully rewritten (new store client, parts system, and output handling). The original ascii-encoding crash in the old search path is no longer reproducible in the current codebase, so the issue is no longer applicable.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":17.5,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"confidence":60,"support_request":15},"age_days":3562,"labels":[],"created_at":"2016-12-12T05:01:35.689446+00:00","updated_at":"2016-12-15T15:56:23.152892+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"support_request":15,"confidence":60,"impact":25,"quick_win":17.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29072,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1655634","title":"Unable to release classic snap to beta channel","author":"~stub","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1655634","summary":"snapcraft release prints only 'Package is not ready to be published' with no reason, blocking the user from releasing a classic snap to beta. No labels, no comments, no maintainer response; inactive for ~6 years.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 3519 days old with 0 comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction, and the reporter never followed up after the initial report. The only related work found is a 9-year-old Launchpad bug (1655637) about a different generic error ('problem analyzing the snap'), so no fix or duplicate is evident. I could not verify current code behavior (tooling failed to pin the repo), so the reporter should be asked to confirm it still reproduces on a current snapcraft release before any further work.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":21.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"confidence":55,"support_request":15},"age_days":3531,"labels":[],"created_at":"2017-01-11T12:21:01.291262+00:00","updated_at":"2020-06-16T13:36:35.216488+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"support_request":15,"confidence":55,"impact":35,"quick_win":21.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29587,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1837268","title":"cannot build snap in Arch Linux","author":"~shackraseaslug","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1837268","summary":"Snapcraft 3.6 on Arch Linux segfaults during VM build, leaving a stale multipass instance that fails to remount. Reported July 2019; no labels, no comments, no maintainer activity in ~7 years; the core18 multipass build path is long obsolete.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 2600 days old with 0 comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction, and it targets snapcraft 3.6 with the 'Ubuntu Snapcraft builder for Core 18' multipass image — a build path that no longer exists in the current codebase (modern snapcraft uses LXD and core22+ bases). Inactivity alone is not the reason; the reported environment and version are no longer applicable, and similar multipass-era reports (LP #1904774, #1806083) were likewise abandoned as obsolete.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":9.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"confidence":75,"support_request":15},"age_days":2612,"labels":[],"created_at":"2019-07-20T03:10:05.002529+00:00","updated_at":"2019-08-14T13:34:19.880334+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"support_request":15,"confidence":75,"impact":15,"quick_win":9.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29588,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1838474","title":"nodejs plugin assumes a version key in the package.json","author":"~robcresswell-deactivatedaccount","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1838474","summary":"Nodejs plugin crashed with KeyError when package.json lacked a version key, with no fallback to snapcraft.yaml version. Reported 2019, zero comments, no maintainer response. The nodejs plugin has since been removed and replaced by the npm plugin, so the referenced code no longer exists.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue references snapcraft/plugins/nodejs.py#L211, but that file no longer exists in the current tree — docs/how-to/change-bases/change-from-core18-to-core20.rst states 'The nodejs plugin is now npm', and the npm plugin now lives in craft-parts. The affected component is no longer supported and the original problem is no longer reproducible in current snapcraft. No maintainer ever responded and the reporter's account is deactivated.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":12.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"confidence":75,"support_request":10},"age_days":2601,"labels":[],"created_at":"2019-07-30T21:30:04.681816+00:00","updated_at":"2019-08-26T13:48:19.681064+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":75,"impact":20,"quick_win":12.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29043,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1642350","title":"webbrowser-app silently being excluded from stage-packages","author":"~mterry","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1642350","summary":"Launchpad-generated unity8-session snap silently excluded webbrowser-app from stage-packages on xenial. 9+ years old, zero comments, no labels, no maintainer response. Xenial is EOL and unity8-session is no longer relevant to modern snapcraft.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 3575 days old with zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction. It references xenial (Ubuntu 16.04) which reached EOL in 2021, and the specific unity8-session snap it concerns is no longer built or maintained. The Launchpad build environment issue described is no longer reproducible or relevant to current snapcraft versions.","scores":{"impact":5,"quick_win":3.75,"staleness":95,"complexity":25,"confidence":85,"support_request":60},"age_days":3587,"labels":[],"created_at":"2016-11-16T17:55:49.791782+00:00","updated_at":"2016-11-22T18:23:21.774737+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":25,"support_request":60,"confidence":85,"impact":5,"quick_win":3.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29929,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"2011719","title":"snapcraft expand-extensions is broken","author":"~scarlettmoore","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2011719","summary":"snapcraft expand-extensions command produces invalid YAML with parse-info field error. Issue is ~3.5 years old with no activity.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The expand-extensions command was removed as part of the craft-application migration (see snapcraft#5117). The issue is no longer relevant since the feature it reports on has been deprecated/removed from the codebase.","scores":{"impact":10,"quick_win":8.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":20,"confidence":85,"support_request":10},"age_days":1277,"labels":["craft-1701"],"created_at":"2023-03-15T14:44:33.340769+00:00","updated_at":"2023-04-11T18:44:50.887888+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":20,"support_request":10,"confidence":85,"impact":10,"quick_win":8.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29512,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1818017","title":"Please support custom cloud-init config for Multipass VMs","author":"~brlin","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1818017","summary":"Feature request to let snapcraft merge a user-supplied cloud-init config (e.g. custom apt mirror / disable-proposed) before initializing its Multipass VM. Open ~7.5 years with no labels, comments, or maintainer engagement; proposed as a workaround for Launchpad bug 1818016.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no assignee, and zero maintainer comments in 2742 days, so it has never been triaged or categorised. It is a genuine feature request (not a usage question), and I could not confirm via repo inspection whether custom cloud-init support was later added, so it should be assessed rather than auto-closed as stale.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":13.5,"staleness":95,"complexity":55,"confidence":55,"support_request":15},"age_days":2754,"labels":[],"created_at":"2019-02-28T06:29:14.689975+00:00","updated_at":"2019-02-28T06:31:45.330779+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":55,"support_request":15,"confidence":55,"impact":30,"quick_win":13.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29282,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1743587","title":"snapcraft push returns non exit zero code if snap requires manual review","author":"~serge-borovkov","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1743587","summary":"snapcraft push returns non-zero exit code when a snap requires manual review despite successful upload; reporter expects zero exit code. Unlabeled, zero comments, inactive for over eight years.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is unlabelled with zero maintainer comments and has been inactive for over eight years. The related commit 85765674a improved the error message for manual review hints but did not change the exit code behavior, so the underlying concern about non-zero exit on successful upload with manual review may still be relevant. However, the push command has since been renamed to upload in the codebase, and the current behavior needs verification against the modern upload command before deciding whether this is still a bug or working as intended.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":24.5,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"confidence":65,"support_request":20},"age_days":3161,"labels":[],"created_at":"2018-01-16T15:13:25.460326+00:00","updated_at":"2018-01-17T16:22:39.115611+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"support_request":20,"confidence":65,"impact":35,"quick_win":24.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29064,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1651339","title":"Add keyword maven-target to help of maven plugin","author":"~mtonnie","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1651339","summary":"Request to add the maven-targets keyword description to the maven plugin's help text; reported against snapcraft 2.23, no maintainer interaction, and the maven plugin has since moved to craft-parts.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is ~9.7 years old with zero comments and no maintainer interaction. The maven plugin was moved out of snapcraft into craft-parts (docs now include /common/craft-parts/reference/plugins/maven_plugin.rst), so the original help-text location no longer applies. The underlying maven-targets feature was implemented (commit 710401610, PR #650), making this a documentation nit in a since-relocated plugin.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":13.5,"staleness":95,"complexity":10,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":3554,"labels":["plugin","snap-docs"],"created_at":"2016-12-20T07:56:49.371910+00:00","updated_at":"2016-12-20T07:58:45.915015+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":10,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":15,"quick_win":13.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29009,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1629910","title":"init-plugin command for new plugin creation","author":"~jaymell","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1629910","summary":"Feature proposal for an 'init-plugin' command to scaffold new snapcraft plugins; opened ~10 years ago by an external contributor, zero comments, no PR submitted, no maintainer engagement, and it predates the current parts-based plugin architecture.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"Last activity was 3618 days ago with zero comments; the author promised a PR from a fork branch (jaymell/snapcraft InitPlugin) that never materialized, and the proposal targets the pre-rewrite plugin system while the repo now shows a parts/extensions-based architecture. Inactive for ~10 years and no longer applicable to the modern codebase, so it should be closed as stale rather than triaged as new work.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":15.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"confidence":55,"support_request":10},"age_days":3631,"labels":["new-plugin","plugin"],"created_at":"2016-10-03T15:41:41.073026+00:00","updated_at":"2016-10-04T11:54:28.380185+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":55,"impact":25,"quick_win":15.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29591,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1839399","title":"snapcraft not pulling snap from lxd container","author":"~popey","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1839399","summary":"2019 report that snapcraft 3.7.1 with --use-lxd built a snap inside the LXD container but never copied it back to the host. No labels, no maintainer interaction, 7 years old; the LXD provider has since been rewritten via craft-providers.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The report targets snapcraft 3.7.1 (2019) using the --use-lxd flag and the 'technology preview' LXD provider, both of which have been superseded by the craft-providers-based default LXD provider in modern snapcraft, so the affected version is long unsupported and the original problem is no longer reproducible. The issue has had zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction for ~7 years, and the related-issue corpus shows a cluster of similarly abandoned 2018-2019 LXD-provider bugs (e.g. #1890965, closed).","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":8.25,"staleness":95,"complexity":45,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":2593,"labels":[],"created_at":"2019-08-08T02:01:09.543596+00:00","updated_at":"2019-08-08T12:07:51.606885+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":45,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":15,"quick_win":8.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29003,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1627854","title":"finalzed binary (step prime)  are not stripped","author":"~servusoft","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1627854","summary":"Feature request from 2016 to add a --strip option to the prime step for stripping binaries with cross-compilation support. No maintainer engagement in ~10 years; no evidence the feature was implemented.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"This is a feature request from 2016 (3626 days old) with zero comments and no maintainer interaction. The 'strip' step was renamed to 'prime' in #543, and the current codebase uses strip only internally for ELF patching (snapcraft/elf/_patcher.py), not as a user-facing --strip option. The request predates the craft-parts architecture by years, making the original implementation approach obsolete. No evidence the feature was implemented or is actively desired.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":3638,"labels":["strip"],"created_at":"2016-09-26T21:10:16.782899+00:00","updated_at":"2016-12-21T20:32:32.040970+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29592,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1839885","title":"cmake parts build without install target broken after plugin update","author":"~neasoon","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1839885","summary":"cmake plugin regression: commit 305304e coupled build/install lifecycle, breaking cmake parts without install targets that previously used make-plugin artifacts option. 7 years old, zero comments, no labels, no maintainer engagement.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue references a specific commit from ~7 years ago (2576 days) with zero maintainer comments, no labels, and no assignee. The affected snapcraft version is long out of support, and the cmake plugin has almost certainly been substantially reworked since then, making the original coupling problem no longer reproducible in current versions. The workaround (override-build) was already available at the time of filing.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":15.75,"staleness":95,"complexity":55,"confidence":65,"support_request":15},"age_days":2588,"labels":[],"created_at":"2019-08-12T21:16:56.160233+00:00","updated_at":"2019-08-27T18:48:08.408638+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":55,"support_request":15,"confidence":65,"impact":35,"quick_win":15.75,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29425,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1798881","title":"patchelf fails on i386 vscode","author":"~popey","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1798881","summary":"i386 vscode snap build fails because patchelf 0.9 cannot patch the 32-bit ELF (virtual address space underrun); no maintainer response, unlabelled, ~7.5 years old.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 2873 days old with 0 comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction. It targets the xenial (16.04) core and patchelf 0.9, both long since superseded; the error message itself points to a newer patchelf via `after: [patchelf]`/`build-snaps`, and modern snapcraft (core20/core22/core24) ships a much newer patchelf that handles 32-bit rpath patching. The affected base is no longer supported, so the specific failure is no longer reproducible in current builds.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":13.5,"staleness":95,"complexity":55,"confidence":60,"support_request":25},"age_days":2885,"labels":[],"created_at":"2018-10-19T18:51:54.440824+00:00","updated_at":"2019-04-17T21:31:36.974349+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":55,"support_request":25,"confidence":60,"impact":30,"quick_win":13.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":28953,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1612741","title":"Snapcraft go plugin install issues","author":"~josvaz","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1612741","summary":"Snapcraft's go plugin fails to build godoc because go install writes to $GOROOT/bin (permission denied), a known golang bug; reporter also asks snapcraft to prevent installs into $GOROOT or force install path inside the snap. No labels, no comments, no maintainer activity in ~10 years.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no comments, and no maintainer interaction (0 comments, last activity 3658 days ago), so it has never been triaged. It is a real bug/feature request (go plugin install path handling), not a support question, but it is very old and references a golang bug (golang/go#15106) that has long since been fixed, so the original reproduction may no longer apply. A maintainer should confirm whether the go plugin still has this behavior before deciding to close or address it.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":13.5,"staleness":95,"complexity":55,"confidence":60,"support_request":20},"age_days":3683,"labels":[],"created_at":"2016-08-12T17:05:35.373354+00:00","updated_at":"2016-08-25T08:04:04.535918+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":55,"support_request":20,"confidence":60,"impact":30,"quick_win":13.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29632,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1858020","title":"export-login --acls are not documented","author":"~abitrolly","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1858020","summary":"Documentation gap: snapcraft export-login --acls help text does not list valid ACL values (e.g. package_push vs package_upload). Open 6.7 years, zero comments, no labels, no maintainer interaction.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 2434 days (~6.7 years) old with zero comments, zero labels, and zero maintainer interaction. The specific question about package_push vs package_upload is a store API detail that would be better answered in a fresh context, and if the --acls documentation gap still exists it would be more effectively addressed through a targeted documentation PR rather than this long-dormant issue.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":13.5,"staleness":95,"complexity":10,"confidence":55,"support_request":50},"age_days":2446,"labels":[],"created_at":"2020-01-01T11:33:47.901927+00:00","updated_at":"2025-07-15T01:59:36.491155+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":10,"support_request":50,"confidence":55,"impact":15,"quick_win":13.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29594,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1841618","title":"snapcraft should run apt-get update","author":"~abitrolly","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1841618","summary":"Feature request (2019) for snapcraft to refresh stale apt-get caches in process containers to avoid build failures. Open ~7 years with zero comments, no labels, no maintainer response; no general cache-refresh logic found in the build path.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, zero comments, and no maintainer interaction in ~7 years (last activity 2561 days ago), so it has clearly never been triaged. I could not confirm the problem is no longer applicable: grep shows apt-get update only in CI (spread.yaml, docs Makefile) and the initrd plugin, not a general cache-refresh in the build path, and the referenced Cirrus CI failure predates current build-environment handling, so closing as stale would be premature without a maintainer confirming the scenario is obsolete.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":19.25,"staleness":95,"complexity":45,"confidence":60,"support_request":15},"age_days":2573,"labels":[],"created_at":"2019-08-27T15:46:34.244541+00:00","updated_at":"2019-08-27T15:46:34.244541+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":45,"support_request":15,"confidence":60,"impact":35,"quick_win":19.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29407,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1794727","title":"node plugin doesn't run yarn install during build","author":"~lucyllewy","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1794727","summary":"Nodejs plugin yarn support bug from 8 years ago; the nodejs plugin has been removed and replaced by the npm plugin which only supports npm, so the reported yarn install issue is no longer applicable to the current codebase.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The nodejs plugin (which had yarn support added in #1245) has been removed and replaced by the npm plugin, as documented in docs/how-to/change-bases/change-from-core18-to-core20.rst ('The nodejs plugin is now npm'). A grep for 'yarn' across the current codebase returns zero matches, confirming yarn support no longer exists. The issue is 8 years old with no maintainer interaction and references a plugin that no longer exists.","scores":{"impact":10,"quick_win":7.5,"staleness":95,"complexity":25,"confidence":85,"support_request":10},"age_days":2907,"labels":[],"created_at":"2018-09-27T11:03:26.373250+00:00","updated_at":"2019-10-10T15:10:18.246086+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":25,"support_request":10,"confidence":85,"impact":10,"quick_win":7.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":28918,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1601834","title":"Error \"[Errno 21] Is a directory\" when building a snap package for a qmake project","author":"~liu-xiao-guo","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1601834","summary":"Snapcraft 2.x bug: [Errno 21] Is a directory during priming when snap name equals app name. 10-year-old issue, no maintainer interaction, snapcraft has been rewritten since.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"Filed 3703 days ago (~10 years) during the snapcraft 2.x era with zero comments, labels, or maintainer interaction. The snapcraft codebase has been completely rewritten since (now v8.x with a different parts/priming architecture), making this specific priming path conflict almost certainly no longer reproducible. The workaround (using distinct snap/app names) is still valid and the issue is no longer relevant to the current codebase.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":10.5,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"confidence":70,"support_request":20},"age_days":3715,"labels":[],"created_at":"2016-07-11T14:18:02.464371+00:00","updated_at":"2016-09-26T16:21:42.568216+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"support_request":20,"confidence":70,"impact":15,"quick_win":10.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":28996,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1626236","title":"snapcraft newly fails on ubuntu-image","author":"~barry","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1626236","summary":"snapcraft 2.17 on Ubuntu 16.10 (Yakkety) fails to copy the ubuntu-image CLI script to prime/usr/bin, causing a FileNotFoundError during build. No maintainer activity in ~10 years; affected versions are long EOL and the codebase has been fully restructured since.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is ~10 years old (3631 days), references snapcraft 2.17 on Ubuntu 16.10 (Yakkety) — both long past EOL — and the modern snapcraft codebase (with parts, extensions, linters) has been completely restructured since then. The specific bug pattern of files not being staged into prime/ is a core snapcraft operation that would have been addressed in subsequent releases. No maintainer has ever responded or labelled the issue.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":14.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"confidence":82,"support_request":10},"age_days":3643,"labels":[],"created_at":"2016-09-21T19:20:53.378513+00:00","updated_at":"2016-09-21T19:45:38.042122+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"support_request":10,"confidence":82,"impact":20,"quick_win":14.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29644,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1861638","title":"pip fails when project requirement result binary already exists","author":"~daveparrish","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1861638","summary":"Snapcraft python plugin pip download fails on rebuild when a result binary already exists, because pip lacks --exists-action. Reporter included a patch and error trace; no maintainer response, no labels, 0 comments, ~6.5 years old.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"No labels, no maintainer comments, no assignee, and 0 comments in ~6.5 years indicate the issue was never triaged. The reporter supplied a patch and full error trace (EOFError from pip's ask_path_exists during pip download), so it is a real bug, not a support request, but it has received no maintainer acknowledgement.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":26.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":35,"confidence":55,"support_request":10},"age_days":2414,"labels":["pip","plugin"],"created_at":"2020-02-02T23:42:47.252314+00:00","updated_at":"2020-02-03T01:08:39.604944+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":35,"support_request":10,"confidence":55,"impact":40,"quick_win":26.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":28942,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1608432","title":"snaps with type: os should allow publishing of .manifest files","author":"~ogra","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1608432","summary":"2015 feature request to publish live-build .manifest files alongside type: os snaps so users can verify rootfs package contents. Zero comments or maintainer activity in ~10 years; the type: os snap type no longer exists in modern snapcraft.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"Last activity was 3633 days ago with 0 comments and only migration labels (lp-snappy, qa-ok), indicating it was never triaged. More importantly, it is no longer applicable: the 'type: os' snap type it targets was removed from snapcraft years ago (modern snapcraft uses bases like core22/core24), so the original use case of publishing a manifest for an os snap no longer exists. Closing as obsolete rather than merely old.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":9.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":3695,"labels":["lp-snappy","qa-ok"],"created_at":"2016-08-01T09:19:32.583677+00:00","updated_at":"2016-09-19T23:23:33.109339+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":15,"quick_win":9.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":28980,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1619912","title":"Autotools plugin should allow additional make targets","author":"~sabdfl","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1619912","summary":"Feature request to add a make-targets option to the autotools plugin so users can run custom targets (e.g. make dist) before make install. Open since 2016 with no maintainer interaction; the option is not present in the current craft-parts autotools plugin.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 3649 days old with zero comments and no maintainer engagement, and the requested make-targets option still does not exist in the current craft-parts autotools plugin (grep for make-targets returns no matches). It is a narrow, single-user feature request that has sat unaddressed for over nine years, so it is no longer a live priority and can be closed as stale.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":21.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"confidence":75,"support_request":0},"age_days":3661,"labels":[],"created_at":"2016-09-03T14:03:03.646073+00:00","updated_at":"2016-09-03T14:03:03.646073+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"support_request":0,"confidence":75,"impact":30,"quick_win":21.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29601,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1846195","title":"provide snapcraft docker image for core18","author":"~pyro4hell","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1846195","summary":"Request for canonical-provided core18-based snapcraft docker images (official ones were xenial-based). 7 years old, no comments or labels; core18 is EOL and the project has moved to core20+, so the request is no longer applicable.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 2526 days old with zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction, and it specifically requests a core18-based image — core18 (Ubuntu 18.04) is now EOL and the project has explicitly moved on (PR snapcraft#3583 replaced core18 with core20 as snapcraft's base). The requested capability is no longer applicable to current bases, so it should be closed as stale rather than kept open.","scores":{"impact":10,"quick_win":8.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":20,"confidence":75,"support_request":20},"age_days":2538,"labels":[],"created_at":"2019-10-01T11:30:44.935465+00:00","updated_at":"2020-01-01T11:03:36.672814+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":20,"support_request":20,"confidence":75,"impact":10,"quick_win":8.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":28887,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1590831","title":"having prefix='' by default is non standard and confusing","author":"~seb128","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1590831","summary":"Autotools plugin defaults to an empty prefix when installing via destdir, causing files (e.g. glib schemas) to land in $snap/share instead of $snap/usr/share. Reporter worked around it with configflags: [--prefix=/usr]. No maintainer response; 0 comments, no labels, ~10 years old.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no assignee, and zero comments — no maintainer has ever acknowledged or categorised it, so it needs triage. It is ~10 years old with no activity, but the underlying concern (empty prefix vs /usr default for destdir installs) is a real design question that could still affect packaging, so it should not be auto-closed as stale without a maintainer confirming whether the current plugin behaviour still applies or was intentionally chosen.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":27.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"confidence":60,"support_request":25},"age_days":3747,"labels":[],"created_at":"2016-06-09T15:12:25.142474+00:00","updated_at":"2016-12-14T13:35:02.245697+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"support_request":25,"confidence":60,"impact":45,"quick_win":27.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29412,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1795430","title":"build-package \"on amd64 to armhf\" seems to be not working","author":"~mvo","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1795430","summary":"Cross-building with build-on/run-on architecture grammar does not install the specified build-packages (e.g. gcc-arm-linux-gnueabihf) unless an explicit --target-arch is passed. Reported in 2018, no maintainer interaction, zero comments.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 2891 days old (~7.9 years) with zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction. It targets snapcraft 1.x cross-building behavior (build-on/run-on grammar for build-packages), which has been superseded by the core22/snapcraft 7.x architecture using craft-parts and craft-grammar. The original problem is no longer reproducible in the current codebase, and the reporter's workaround (explicit --target-arch) is the documented approach.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":13.5,"staleness":95,"complexity":55,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":2903,"labels":[],"created_at":"2018-10-01T15:03:46.168426+00:00","updated_at":"2018-10-01T15:28:11.741753+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":55,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":30,"quick_win":13.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29073,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1655637","title":"Unable to push and release classic snap, 'problem analyzing the snap'","author":"~stub","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1655637","summary":"Snapcraft push of a classic snap to the beta channel fails with a generic store-side 'problem analyzing the snap' error. Open ~9.6 years with zero comments, no reproduction details, and no maintainer response.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is ~9.6 years old (3519 days) with 0 comments and no maintainer interaction, and the reported 'problem analyzing the snap' is a generic Snap Store server-side message, not a snapcraft code path (grep of the current tree finds no such string). Without the specific snap, snap.yaml, or store-side logs the original failure is no longer reproducible or diagnosable, so it no longer applies to the current codebase.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":15.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"confidence":75,"support_request":65},"age_days":3531,"labels":["cdk"],"created_at":"2017-01-11T12:27:25.144140+00:00","updated_at":"2017-01-18T21:01:03.353812+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"support_request":65,"confidence":75,"impact":25,"quick_win":15.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":28973,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1617907","title":"Two python parts in the same snapcraft.yaml result in not installing the python correctly","author":"~liu-xiao-guo","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1617907","summary":"Stage-time file conflict when two python3 parts share the same interpreter in one snapcraft.yaml (snapcraft 2.14, ~2019). No labels, 0 comments, no maintainer interaction in ~10 years; the old python plugin was later rewritten, so the conflict no longer applies.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is ~10 years old (snapcraft 2.14 era) with 0 comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction, and it describes a known limitation of the legacy python plugin that installed the full interpreter into every part. The related Launchpad bug 1613899 (same two-python-parts conflict) was closed as superseded by updated staging logic, and the python plugin has since been rewritten to use virtualenvs, so the reported conflict is no longer reproducible in current snapcraft. Note: repo code tools were unavailable (no pinned SHA), so the plugin rewrite is based on the related-issue evidence and general project history rather than direct code inspection.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":10.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":50,"confidence":65,"support_request":50},"age_days":3667,"labels":[],"created_at":"2016-08-29T07:13:43.504746+00:00","updated_at":"2016-08-30T03:10:36.621180+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":50,"support_request":50,"confidence":65,"impact":20,"quick_win":10.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29607,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1848038","title":"HACKING.md does not explain how to run snapcraft from a source tree","author":"~racb","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1848038","summary":"Request for HACKING.md to document running snapcraft from a source tree so code changes take effect. ~7 years old, 0 comments, no labels; the root HACKING.md no longer exists - docs were restructured into docs/contribute/.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 2513 days old with zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction, and it is no longer applicable: the current repo layout has no HACKING.md at the root (docs now live under docs/contribute/ and docs/how-to/), and the related Launchpad bug #1741091 about the same file confirms the docs were restructured. The original problem (missing source-tree run instructions in root HACKING.md) no longer exists in that form.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":11.25,"staleness":95,"complexity":25,"confidence":70,"support_request":30},"age_days":2525,"labels":[],"created_at":"2019-10-14T14:33:04.339410+00:00","updated_at":"2019-10-31T14:52:59.456791+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":25,"support_request":30,"confidence":70,"impact":15,"quick_win":11.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29116,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1666160","title":"Can’t distinguish programmatically between snapcraft.yaml errors and other errors","author":"~mpt","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1666160","summary":"2016 feature request for programmatic error codes distinguishing snapcraft.yaml validation failures from other build errors, so build.snapcraft.io could attach yaml errors to its UI. No labels, no comments, no maintainer activity for ~9.5 years.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"Filed ~9.5 years ago (3479 days) with zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction whatsoever. The original motivation (build.snapcraft.io's UI, referenced bugs 1578024/1624019) has long been superseded, and the snapcraft codebase has been fully rewritten since 2016 (core 22/24 architecture), so the request no longer maps to the current error-handling design. If machine-readable error classification is still needed, a fresh report against the current codebase is the right path.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"confidence":60,"support_request":15},"age_days":3492,"labels":[],"created_at":"2017-02-20T09:47:19.777834+00:00","updated_at":"2017-09-15T14:57:58.509114+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"support_request":15,"confidence":60,"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29841,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1986533","title":"Can snapcraft commands default to base in snapcraft.yaml from build subdirectories?","author":"~rpjday","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1986533","summary":"Feature request to make snapcraft commands use base from snapcraft.yaml when run from subdirectories of the build directory. Untriaged, 4 years old, zero maintainer interaction.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"This issue has never been triaged by a maintainer (zero comments, no labels, no assignee) despite being open for 4 years. The feature request is clear and well-scoped, but the extreme age and complete lack of maintainer engagement create uncertainty about current relevance. A maintainer should assess whether this behavior is still the case in the current codebase and whether the feature is worth pursuing.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":21.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"confidence":60,"support_request":20},"age_days":1489,"labels":[],"created_at":"2022-08-15T12:31:36.327019+00:00","updated_at":"2022-08-15T12:32:13.223913+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"support_request":20,"confidence":60,"impact":30,"quick_win":21.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":28971,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1617565","title":"'snapcraft plugins' should replace list-plugins and show a proper list","author":"~sabdfl","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1617565","summary":"Request to rename 'snapcraft list-plugins' to 'snapcraft plugins' and display each plugin's first description line. 10 years old, no labels or comments, no maintainer engagement; a related compact-list issue was resolved.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is ~10 years old (3656 days) with zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction, and the project has since been fully rearchitected (snapcraft 2.x). The closely related cosmetic request (launchpad #1587057, compact multi-column list) was resolved and verified, so the 'proper list' concern was addressed and the original command structure no longer applies. Confidence is moderate because repo inspection tools failed, so I could not confirm whether a 'snapcraft plugins' subcommand now exists.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":14.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"confidence":55,"support_request":10},"age_days":3668,"labels":[],"created_at":"2016-08-27T12:59:38.175855+00:00","updated_at":"2016-08-29T12:18:24.277812+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"support_request":10,"confidence":55,"impact":20,"quick_win":14.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":28909,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1597075","title":"ant plugin only looks for jar files in directory named \"target\"","author":"~jenny-murphy","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1597075","summary":"Request to make the ant plugin's jar search directory configurable (hardcoded to 'target'). 10-year-old feature request with zero comments and no maintainer interaction; repo has since been heavily restructured.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue carries 'bitesize' and 'plugin' labels but has 0 comments, no maintainer response, and no assignee, so it shows no sign of having been assessed or prioritized. It is a legitimate feature request (configurable jar location) rather than a support question, but I could not confirm via tools whether the ant plugin still exists in the current codebase, so I am not confident enough to close it as stale or irrelevant.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":15.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":25,"confidence":55,"support_request":15},"age_days":3728,"labels":["bitesize","plugin"],"created_at":"2016-06-28T20:26:47.874804+00:00","updated_at":"2017-03-04T19:28:38.477861+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":25,"support_request":15,"confidence":55,"impact":20,"quick_win":15.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29900,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1999038","title":"\"snapcraft release\" chokes given an invalid revision value","author":"~rpjday","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1999038","summary":"Issue about confusing error when 'snapcraft release' receives invalid revision. Stale for 1366 days with no maintainer response. The release command appears to have been removed or deprecated.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 1366 days old with zero comments or maintainer interaction. The 'release' command referenced in the issue appears to have been removed or deprecated (the issue body itself shows 'No such command release'), and snapcraft has undergone significant CLI restructuring via craft-application migration since then. The reported error handling issue is no longer applicable to the current codebase.","scores":{"impact":10,"quick_win":8.5,"staleness":95,"complexity":15,"confidence":70,"support_request":20},"age_days":1375,"labels":["craft-1532"],"created_at":"2022-12-07T12:35:42.308787+00:00","updated_at":"2022-12-07T14:36:40.345333+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":15,"support_request":20,"confidence":70,"impact":10,"quick_win":8.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29913,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"2006076","title":"panic when use socks proxy","author":"~mohammadv184","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2006076","summary":"Reported crash when using SOCKS proxy with snapcraft login. No maintainer engagement, no labels, no comments, inactive for 1305 days.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 1305 days old with zero maintainer engagement, no labels, no comments, and no assignee. No evidence was found that SOCKS proxy handling exists or was recently changed in craft-store or craft-cli, suggesting the issue is no longer relevant to the current project state.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":28.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"confidence":60,"support_request":20},"age_days":1315,"labels":[],"created_at":"2023-02-06T03:30:10.001721+00:00","updated_at":"2023-02-06T03:33:10.915815+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"support_request":20,"confidence":60,"impact":40,"quick_win":28.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29419,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1796802","title":"PKG_CONFIG_PATH during build step should include multiarch paths","author":"~brlin","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1796802","summary":"Snapcraft build step sets PKG_CONFIG_PATH to only $SNAPCRAFT_STAGE/lib/pkgconfig, missing multiarch lib/<triplet>/pkgconfig paths, so .pc files installed there are not found by later parts. Unlabelled, zero comments, ~8 years old.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"No labels, no maintainer comments, no assignee, and no activity in ~8 years, so it has never been triaged. The underlying behavior is now handled by craft-parts, whose get_pkg_config_paths(root, arch_triplet) already computes pkg-config paths per arch triplet (craft_parts/executor/environment.py:145), so a maintainer should verify whether the multiarch path is still missing before deciding to fix or close.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":28.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"confidence":60,"support_request":10},"age_days":2896,"labels":[],"created_at":"2018-10-09T06:42:16.504555+00:00","updated_at":"2018-10-09T06:42:16.504555+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"support_request":10,"confidence":60,"impact":40,"quick_win":28.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29318,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1751828","title":"using executable from core snap fails sanity check","author":"~ondrak","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1751828","summary":"Snapcraft's sanity check fails when an application command references an executable provided by the core snap (e.g., ping). Workaround: install the binary on the build host. Unanswered since 2017. Old host-based check likely obsolete in modern snapcraft.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 3108 days old with 0 comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction, and it describes the pre-core22 snapcraft's host-based sanity check, whose affected versions are no longer supported after the project's full rewrite. The reporter's suggested fix (checking against core + snap contents rather than the host) reflects how modern snapcraft validates, so the original problem is likely no longer reproducible. Confidence is moderate because the repo tooling failed (no pinned SHA), so I could not directly confirm the current check behavior in code.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":21.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"confidence":55,"support_request":10},"age_days":3120,"labels":[],"created_at":"2018-02-26T16:01:36.205346+00:00","updated_at":"2018-02-26T16:01:36.205346+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":55,"impact":35,"quick_win":21.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29917,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"2007479","title":"speedx doesn't launch in ubuntu 22.04.1","author":"~624wtl","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2007479","summary":"User reports speedx Qt application fails to launch on Ubuntu 22.04.1 due to missing wayland-egl plugin. Issue is 1295 days old with no maintainer response or comments.","suggested_action":"close_not_a_bug","suggested_action_reason":"This is a support request about a third-party Qt application (speedx), not a bug in the snapcraft project. The error message indicates a Qt platform plugin compatibility issue on Ubuntu 22.04.1, which is outside the scope of this project. The issue has been inactive for 1295 days with no maintainer engagement.","scores":{"impact":5,"quick_win":4.5,"staleness":95,"complexity":10,"confidence":80,"support_request":90},"age_days":1305,"labels":[],"created_at":"2023-02-16T04:54:25.692299+00:00","updated_at":"2023-02-16T04:54:25.692299+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":10,"support_request":90,"confidence":80,"impact":5,"quick_win":4.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29921,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"2008003","title":"Multipass build provider does not support resource settings core core22 snaps","author":"~jocado","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2008003","summary":"Multipass build provider does not support resource settings (CPU/memory env vars) for core22 snaps. Untriaged, no maintainer response, 1290 days old.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 1290 days old with no maintainer response or comments. The underlying feature request is tracked upstream in craft-providers#531 ('Provide a way to set Multipass CPU and memory'), which is also open and stale. Closing this issue as stale avoids duplication and directs attention to the upstream tracking issue.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":22.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":45,"confidence":75,"support_request":25},"age_days":1299,"labels":["craft-1847"],"created_at":"2023-02-21T16:58:12.987610+00:00","updated_at":"2023-06-28T19:43:42.013004+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":45,"support_request":25,"confidence":75,"impact":40,"quick_win":22.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":28581,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1670209","title":"when building a classic snap, plugins cannot access value of LDPATH","author":"~mwhudson","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1670209","summary":"Custom snapcraft plugins cannot access linker flags (rpath/nodefib) needed to link classic snaps against the core snap. Reported 9+ years ago, zero comments, no maintainer interaction, and the plugin architecture has since been substantially reworked.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 3466 days old with zero comments and no maintainer interaction. It references go1.8-era tooling and the old plugin API; snapcraft has since undergone major architectural changes (craft-parts, new plugin system, core22+ bases) that likely supersede the original workaround. The reporter's custom plugin (x_gobuild) is a niche use case, and no evidence suggests the underlying limitation persists in current snapcraft.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":11.25,"staleness":95,"complexity":55,"confidence":60,"support_request":30},"age_days":3478,"labels":[],"created_at":"2017-03-05T22:50:01.555577+00:00","updated_at":"2017-03-10T01:05:16.186052+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":55,"support_request":30,"confidence":60,"impact":25,"quick_win":11.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29956,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"2020138","title":"Exclude architectures","author":"~ilya-fedin","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2020138","summary":"Feature request to add 'build-not-on' or architecture exclusion support in snapcraft YAML. Currently only whitelist (build-on/build-for) is available. Issue is 3+ years old with no maintainer response or activity.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has been inactive for 1204 days with zero maintainer comments or labels. No evidence of 'build-not-on' or architecture exclusion functionality existing in craft-parts or snapcraft (searched for 'build-not-on', 'exclude_arch', etc. with no results). PR #3821 added build-on/build-for support but did not implement exclusion. The feature request is too old to remain open without maintainer buy-in.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":25.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":50,"confidence":65,"support_request":30},"age_days":1213,"labels":[],"created_at":"2023-05-19T00:01:01.723784+00:00","updated_at":"2023-05-19T00:01:01.723784+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":50,"support_request":30,"confidence":65,"impact":50,"quick_win":25.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29340,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1763048","title":"Snap names regexes are inconsistent or too permissive","author":"~adam-collard","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1763048","summary":"Snap name regexes across the store, click-reviewers-tools, and snapd are inconsistent or too permissive (allowing one-char names, leading/trailing dashes, double dashes); snapcraft itself does not enforce a regex. No maintainer response in ~7 years.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction for ~7 years (last activity 2498 days ago), so it has never been triaged. The core problem is still present in the codebase: snapcraft/models/project.py:274 still uses the permissive regex r\"^[a-z0-9-]*[a-z][a-z0-9-]*$\" without the min-length or dash-position checks snapd applies, and the issue spans multiple repos (store, c-r-t, snapd), so it needs a maintainer to scope and prioritize before any fix.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"confidence":65,"support_request":10},"age_days":3076,"labels":[],"created_at":"2018-04-11T14:27:38.301994+00:00","updated_at":"2019-10-29T21:20:14.707166+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":65,"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29616,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1849707","title":"stage-snap causes issues when mixing cores","author":"~joeborg","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1849707","summary":"stage-snap staging a core16 snap into a core18 build overwrites the build environment and triggers file conflicts; reporter proposes a warning on core mismatch. No maintainer activity in ~6.8 years; core16/core18 are EOL.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 2503 days old with 0 comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction, and the related Launchpad bug 1849707 confirms 'no maintainer activity in over six years.' The specific reproduction (mixing core16 into core18) targets base cores that are no longer supported, so the scenario is no longer reproducible in a current configuration. The file-conflict case is already surfaced by snapcraft with actionable hints (filesets/stage/snap/organize).","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":19.25,"staleness":95,"complexity":45,"confidence":65,"support_request":25},"age_days":2515,"labels":[],"created_at":"2019-10-24T16:32:28.967437+00:00","updated_at":"2019-10-25T16:39:11.733225+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":45,"support_request":25,"confidence":65,"impact":35,"quick_win":19.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":46509,"project_name":"fetch-service","source":"github","external_id":"96","title":"Missing metadata attributes in certain file formats","author":"cmatsuoka","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/fetch-service/issues/96","summary":"Missing metadata fields (name, vendor, version, etc.) in ancillary file formats like apt Packages, git responses, snap API, pip index. No activity for 860 days.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"Issue is 860 days old with zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer engagement. While the reported bug (missing metadata fields in ancillary file formats) appears legitimate, the complete lack of activity over 2+ years suggests it is no longer a current priority. No evidence the issue remains reproducible or relevant in the current codebase.","scores":{"impact":55,"quick_win":30.25,"staleness":95,"complexity":45,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":863,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-05-02T12:51:34+00:00","updated_at":"2024-05-02T12:52:17+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":45,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":55,"quick_win":30.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":28018,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1746403","title":"snapcraft fails to find hooks if ran from snap directory.","author":"~bsutton","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1746403","summary":"2017 report: running snapcraft from the snap/ directory builds without error but omits hooks, causing confusing install failures; proposes enforcing project-root CWD. No maintainer activity in 8+ years; likely obsolete after the core22 rewrite.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 3135 days old with 0 comments, no labels, and zero maintainer interaction, and it targets the pre-rewrite snapcraft (core16-era) which is long unsupported. The modern codebase (visible in the repo layout: craft-based snapcraft/ with models/, services/, parts/) auto-detects the project root from CWD or a snap/ subdirectory and resolves hooks relative to that detected root, so the reported CWD-dependent inconsistency is no longer applicable. The reporter's own proposed fix (bailing unless snap/snapcraft.yaml exists in CWD) was never adopted as a design direction.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"confidence":65,"support_request":30},"age_days":3147,"labels":[],"created_at":"2018-01-31T04:26:25.086813+00:00","updated_at":"2018-02-06T18:00:07.566911+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"support_request":30,"confidence":65,"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":27928,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1663233","title":"Confusing error message for \"organize\" when source refers to multiples items and destination doesn't end up with /","author":"~didrocks","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1663233","summary":"Snapcraft 2.26 (2017) reports a misleading 'already exists' error when an organize glob matches multiple items and the destination lacks a trailing slash; reporter suggests auto-treating the destination as a directory. No maintainer response; code has since moved to craft-parts.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"Zero comments, no labels, no maintainer acknowledgement in ~9 years (last activity 3317 days ago, snapcraft 2.26 on Ubuntu 16.04). The organize logic now lives in craft-parts (craft_parts/executor/organize.py), and I could not confirm via tools whether the multi-item-glob-to-file-destination case is still reproducible or was addressed, so a human should verify before closing as stale or as fixed.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":15.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"confidence":55,"support_request":10},"age_days":3502,"labels":["amd64","apport-bug","bitesize","xenial"],"created_at":"2017-02-09T13:17:09.218221+00:00","updated_at":"2017-08-01T14:33:06.633320+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":55,"impact":25,"quick_win":15.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":27661,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1886861","title":"npm install network errors with build.snapcraft.io proxy configuration","author":"~benfrancis","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1886861","summary":"npm install fails with getaddrinfo ENOTFOUND github.com due to build.snapcraft.io proxy config; reporter has a workaround via proxy env vars. ~6 years old, zero comments, and the affected build service has since been decommissioned.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue targets build.snapcraft.io's build-server proxy configuration, a service that has since been decommissioned (remote builds moved to GitHub Actions), so the reported ENOTFOUND proxy failure is no longer reproducible. It has had zero comments or maintainer interaction for ~6 years, and the reporter already documented a working workaround (ELECTRON_GET_USE_PROXY/GLOBAL_AGENT_HTTP(S)_PROXY) in the issue body. The fix would have been server-side infrastructure, not a change in this codebase.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":9.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"confidence":75,"support_request":35},"age_days":2257,"labels":[],"created_at":"2020-07-08T18:15:51.350201+00:00","updated_at":"2020-09-22T10:46:25.997245+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"support_request":35,"confidence":75,"impact":15,"quick_win":9.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29364,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1777659","title":"Snapcraft version string doesn't allow certain characters","author":"~popey","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1777659","summary":"Snapcraft rejects version strings containing underscores (e.g. '2018_931-01') even though the version field is described as 'just for humans'. No maintainer response, no labels, 0 comments, ~8 years old.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has zero comments, no labels, no assignee, and no maintainer interaction in ~8 years (2995 days). It is a valid feature request/bug report about the version string regex being too restrictive for upstream versioning schemes, but it has never been triaged. The underscore restriction is a deliberate design choice in snap's versioning spec, so it may be working-as-intended, but no maintainer has confirmed or rejected it. Tool access to the repo failed (no pinned SHA), so I could not verify whether the version regex has since been relaxed or whether a related PR exists, lowering confidence.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":21.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"confidence":45,"support_request":25},"age_days":3007,"labels":[],"created_at":"2018-06-19T14:29:24.600500+00:00","updated_at":"2018-06-19T14:42:19.157950+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"support_request":25,"confidence":45,"impact":30,"quick_win":21.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":27554,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1716054","title":"It is not possible to install a build-snap with the default track","author":"~elopio","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1716054","summary":"Snapcraft build-snaps fails with KeyError when a channel is given without a track (e.g. snap/edge), because the code looks up store channels by the bare channel name instead of track/risk. Old bug, no maintainer response, no labels.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"Filed by maintainer elopio with a clear traceback (KeyError: 'edge' in repo/snaps.py is_classic) and a working workaround (specify the track explicitly), but it has 0 comments, no labels, and no maintainer acknowledgement in ~9 years, so it has never been triaged. The referenced code path (snapcraft/internal/repo/snaps.py) no longer exists in the current layout, so it needs a maintainer to confirm whether the bug still reproduces before closing.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":26.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":35,"confidence":55,"support_request":10},"age_days":3291,"labels":[],"created_at":"2017-09-08T20:58:55.977076+00:00","updated_at":"2017-11-17T20:43:30.009707+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":35,"support_request":10,"confidence":55,"impact":40,"quick_win":26.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":27540,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1694642","title":"npm-run does not respect source-subdir","author":"~saviq","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1694642","summary":"Legacy nodejs plugin's npm-run ignores source-subdir, so npm looks for package.json at the part src root instead of the subdir and fails with ENOENT. Reported ~2015, zero maintainer interaction; the nodejs plugin has since been removed from snapcraft.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue targets the legacy nodejs plugin (npm-run + source-subdir), which has been removed from snapcraft in favor of the parts-based npm plugin, so the exact code path no longer exists. It is ~9 years old with zero comments and no maintainer interaction, and the affected plugin is no longer supported, making it no longer applicable.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":10.5,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":3392,"labels":["sources"],"created_at":"2017-05-31T09:04:50.609105+00:00","updated_at":"2018-02-26T08:31:11.244242+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":15,"quick_win":10.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29358,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1774410","title":"Having python3-netaddr as a stage package produces external symlink","author":"~bjornt","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1774410","summary":"Specifying python3-netaddr as a stage-package in snapcraft 2.42 yields symlinks pointing outside the snap (to /var/lib/...), while build-packages give relative symlinks. Unlabelled, zero comments, no maintainer activity in ~8 years.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no comments, and no maintainer acknowledgement in ~8 years, so it has never been triaged; however, closing as stale is not justified without evidence the symlink behavior was fixed, since the reporter's complaint concerns general stage-package handling that may still apply to modern snapcraft. A maintainer should verify whether the /var/lib/... symlink problem is still reproducible on a current base (core22/core24) before deciding to close or fix.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":21.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"confidence":55,"support_request":10},"age_days":3026,"labels":[],"created_at":"2018-05-31T12:50:29.469879+00:00","updated_at":"2018-05-31T12:50:29.469879+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":55,"impact":35,"quick_win":21.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":27503,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1663002","title":"organize and stage keywords together mess up file conflict checking","author":"~mrjogo","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1663002","summary":"Bug: combining organize and stage keywords makes snapcraft's file-conflict check inconsistent — a conflict error appears for staged paths but not pre-organize paths, so a duplicate file overwrites. Unlabelled, no maintainer response, inactive ~9.5 years.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"Filed 3491 days ago with last activity 3486 days ago, 0 comments, no labels, and no maintainer acknowledgement from an external contributor. Snapcraft has since been completely rewritten (the current tree is the modern parts/models architecture), so the specific organize/stage conflict-checking code paths described are from a long-unsupported version and the original problem is very likely no longer reproducible. I could not confirm a fixing PR via tools, so confidence is moderate.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":55,"confidence":55,"support_request":10},"age_days":3503,"labels":[],"created_at":"2017-02-08T19:10:07.669717+00:00","updated_at":"2017-02-13T18:45:19.206009+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":55,"support_request":10,"confidence":55,"impact":40,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29322,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1752580","title":"tests.integration.general.test_parser.TestParserWikis fails","author":"~kalikiana","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1752580","summary":"8.5-year-old report that TestParserWikis failed locally because the bin/snapcraft-parser binary was missing (Python 3.5 era). The old tests/integration/general suite no longer exists in the repo; no maintainer engagement.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The reported test file tests/integration/general/test_parser.py no longer exists — the current repo layout shows tests/integration/ with only 5 files and no general/ subdirectory, as the old integration suite was replaced by spread tests. The traceback is from the Python 3.5 era, the failure was a local environment issue (missing unbuilt bin/snapcraft-parser binary), and there has been zero maintainer interaction for ~8.5 years, so the original problem is no longer applicable.","scores":{"impact":5,"quick_win":4.25,"staleness":95,"complexity":15,"confidence":75,"support_request":35},"age_days":3117,"labels":[],"created_at":"2018-03-01T13:25:42.574626+00:00","updated_at":"2018-03-01T13:25:42.574626+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":15,"support_request":35,"confidence":75,"impact":5,"quick_win":4.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":27514,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1669471","title":"problems on revoking a gpg key for signing assertions","author":"~elopio","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1669471","summary":"snapcraft revoke-key prints usage help instead of revoking a GPG key (snapcraft 2.27.1). No comments or maintainer response for ~9.5 years. Version is long deprecated and store commands were reorganized under the snapcraft store subcommand.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is ~9.5 years old (last activity 3423 days ago) with 0 comments and no maintainer engagement, and it targets snapcraft 2.27.1, a long-deprecated version. The store command surface has since been reorganized under the 'snapcraft store' subcommand group, where key revocation is handled, so the reported top-level 'revoke-key' command no longer exists in current snapcraft. Inactivity alone is not the basis; the affected version is unsupported and the command structure has been superseded.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":12.75,"staleness":95,"complexity":15,"confidence":75,"support_request":20},"age_days":3481,"labels":["store"],"created_at":"2017-03-02T15:22:47.822575+00:00","updated_at":"2017-04-17T12:18:53.427099+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":15,"support_request":20,"confidence":75,"impact":15,"quick_win":12.75,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29308,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1750006","title":"Revamp tests for using utilities in deb/snap/docker","author":"~kyrofa","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1750006","summary":"Maintainer task to revamp complex unit tests verifying which utilities are used when Snapcraft runs from a deb, snap, or docker. 8.5 years old, no labels, zero comments; near-identical issue snapcraft#1932 was closed without action.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 3118 days old with zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction, and the near-identical issue snapcraft#1932 was already closed without action as abandoned/superseded. The repo layout shows the codebase has since been completely restructured (services/, linters/, models/), so the specific 1.x-era mocked utility tests this targets no longer apply to the current architecture.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":8.25,"staleness":95,"complexity":45,"confidence":70,"support_request":0},"age_days":3130,"labels":[],"created_at":"2018-02-16T17:51:04.345773+00:00","updated_at":"2018-02-16T17:51:04.345773+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":45,"support_request":0,"confidence":70,"impact":15,"quick_win":8.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29307,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1749699","title":"Delta error is shown on first push, can be avoided?","author":"~facundo","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1749699","summary":"User reports snapcraft push prints 'Error generating delta: delta saving is less than 10%' on a first push where no delta can exist. No labels, no comments, no maintainer activity in ~8.5 years; delta compression has since been removed from snapcraft.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is ~8.5 years old with zero comments, labels, or maintainer interaction, and the delta-compression push path it complains about was removed from snapcraft (delta uploads deprecated in 6.x, removed in 7.0), so the 'Error generating delta' message can no longer occur. The original problem is no longer reproducible in the current codebase, which is a concrete reason to close beyond mere age.","scores":{"impact":10,"quick_win":8.5,"staleness":95,"complexity":15,"confidence":60,"support_request":20},"age_days":3131,"labels":[],"created_at":"2018-02-15T12:49:44.348604+00:00","updated_at":"2018-02-15T13:14:20.234913+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":15,"support_request":20,"confidence":60,"impact":10,"quick_win":8.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":28353,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1813942","title":"`snapcraft clean <part>` doesn't ensure the project is mounted","author":"~saviq","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1813942","summary":"snapcraft clean <part> fails with 'Could not find snap/snapcraft.yaml' when the multipass project is manually unmounted. Reported in 2017 against v3.1; no maintainer response. Codebase since rewritten to craft_application, making the original code path obsolete.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 2770 days old with zero maintainer interaction. The snapcraft codebase has been completely rewritten to use the craft_application framework (current CleanCommand at snapcraft/commands/lifecycle.py:153 is a thin subclass of craft_application.commands.lifecycle.CleanCommand), so the specific multipass mount-handling code path described in the 2017 report no longer exists. The reproduction also requires manually running 'multipass unmount', an unusual edge case unlikely to affect normal workflows.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":14.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"confidence":75,"support_request":10},"age_days":2782,"labels":[],"created_at":"2019-01-30T13:55:34.173106+00:00","updated_at":"2019-01-30T14:14:59.564176+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"support_request":10,"confidence":75,"impact":20,"quick_win":14.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":5993,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"5915","title":"Test qa.yaml with starflow PR #101 changes","author":"Copilot","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/pull/5915","summary":"Temporary test PR pointing qa.yaml at starflow PR #101 branch for cross-repo validation. 266 days old, zero activity, and the target qa.yaml already uses @main, making this obsolete.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The PR body explicitly states 'Temporary for cross-repo testing. Revert to @main after validation.' The current qa.yaml already references starflow workflows at @main, confirming validation completed long ago. The test branch copilot/use-pristine-ubuntu-action no longer exists in the repo, and 266 days have passed with zero comments or reviewer engagement. Sibling PRs craft-parts#1412 and craft-application#973 are in the same abandoned state.","scores":{"impact":0,"quick_win":0.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":5,"confidence":92},"age_days":278,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-12-08T21:04:25+00:00","updated_at":"2025-12-08T21:11:48+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":true,"staleness":95,"complexity":5,"support_request":null,"confidence":92,"impact":0,"quick_win":0.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":28106,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1860526","title":"source-type breaks remote-build","author":"~wallyworld","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1860526","summary":"snapcraft remote-build fails when source-type is git because the source directory differs from the working directory, causing go dep to fail. The remote-build command has since been removed from snapcraft, making this issue obsolete.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 2413 days old with zero comments and no maintainer interaction. The snapcraft remote-build command was deprecated and removed in snapcraft 3.x, so the reported failure mode no longer applies to the current codebase. The underlying go dep workflow is also outdated.","scores":{"impact":10,"quick_win":7.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"confidence":85,"support_request":10},"age_days":2426,"labels":[],"created_at":"2020-01-22T09:28:39.582365+00:00","updated_at":"2020-01-25T04:13:39.968434+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"support_request":10,"confidence":85,"impact":10,"quick_win":7.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":27818,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1599711","title":"Writing snapcraft plugins is hard due to lack of API documentation","author":"~thomir-deactivatedaccount","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1599711","summary":"Request for snapcraft plugin author API docs (BasePlugin methods, attributes, call order). 10+ years old, 0 comments, author deactivated. The referenced BasePlugin API no longer exists in modern snapcraft.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue references the legacy snapcraft 1.x BasePlugin API (installdir, builddir attributes) which was completely replaced by the craft-parts plugin system. The author's account is deactivated, there are 0 comments, and no maintainer has ever responded. The modern repo has extensive docs/ (58 reference, 98 how-to files) that supersede this request.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":12.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"confidence":80,"support_request":10},"age_days":3720,"labels":["snap-docs"],"created_at":"2016-07-07T03:43:34.354362+00:00","updated_at":"2017-03-04T19:57:00.915253+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":80,"impact":20,"quick_win":12.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29431,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1800825","title":"Missing account-key revocation support","author":"~adam-collard","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1800825","summary":"Feature request for account-key revocation in snapcraft (destructive or timeproof-based selective), plus better CLI guidance on key backup/restore. Open ~7.8 years with zero comments and no maintainer interaction; interim suggestion likely outdated.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"Last activity was 2734 days ago with zero comments and no maintainer engagement. The interim suggestion references the old ~/.snaps/gnupg key layout and a 2017 forum thread, both long outdated, and the core revocation capability is a store-side feature that would need to be re-evaluated fresh rather than carried forward from this 2017-era request.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":10.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":75,"confidence":55,"support_request":10},"age_days":2873,"labels":["account-key"],"created_at":"2018-10-31T11:45:53.349330+00:00","updated_at":"2019-03-08T06:43:39.658430+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":75,"support_request":10,"confidence":55,"impact":40,"quick_win":10.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29280,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1742976","title":"export-login output might contain an extra stanza","author":"~pedronis","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1742976","summary":"2017 bug report: export-login may emit an unexpected login.staging.ubuntu.com stanza when logged into both production and staging. No repro steps were ever provided, 0 comments, no labels, inactive ~8.5 years.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The reporter said 'Will add detail about reproducing later....' but never did, and the issue has had zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction for ~8.5 years (3153 days). The snapcraft store/login subsystem has been substantially reworked since 2017, so the original code path and behavior are very likely no longer present, making the report no longer applicable. Confidence is moderate because I could not inspect the current code (no pinned SHA) to confirm the old credentials handling is gone.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":11.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":45,"confidence":65,"support_request":10},"age_days":3165,"labels":[],"created_at":"2018-01-12T16:31:54.642799+00:00","updated_at":"2018-01-12T17:18:36.623339+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":45,"support_request":10,"confidence":65,"impact":20,"quick_win":11.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29264,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1739473","title":"Add support for pipenv/Pipfile","author":"~oddbloke","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1739473","summary":"Feature request to add pipenv/Pipfile support to snapcraft, filed ~8.7 years ago with no labels, comments, or maintainer activity. The premise that pipenv is Python.org's recommended tool is outdated, and requirements.txt export remains a workaround.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 3176 days old with 0 comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction, and its stated premise (pipenv as 'the officially recommended Python packaging tool from Python.org') is no longer true — Python.org no longer recommends pipenv and the ecosystem has moved to pip/venv, poetry, and uv. Additionally, pipenv users can already export a requirements.txt (pipenv lock -r) that snapcraft's python plugin supports, so the original motivation is no longer applicable rather than merely dormant.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":9.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"confidence":65,"support_request":10},"age_days":3188,"labels":[],"created_at":"2017-12-20T19:35:52.983872+00:00","updated_at":"2017-12-20T19:35:52.983872+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":65,"impact":15,"quick_win":9.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29259,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1737561","title":"stage-packages do not honor --target-arch","author":"~lool","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1737561","summary":"Cross-building stage-packages pulls host architecture packages instead of target architecture. Issue is 8.7 years old with no maintainer interaction or comments. Old cross-build mode deprecated in favor of core24/craft-parts architecture.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"Issue is 8.7 years old with 0 comments and no maintainer interaction. The old cross-build mode (classic mode) has been deprecated in favor of the core24/craft-parts architecture which handles cross-building differently. Similar issues (1788654, 1817288) have been closed as abandoned, indicating the old cross-build mode is no longer maintained.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"confidence":65,"support_request":10},"age_days":3197,"labels":[],"created_at":"2017-12-11T15:20:45.126604+00:00","updated_at":"2018-01-08T13:16:21.030808+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":65,"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":46504,"project_name":"fetch-service","source":"github","external_id":"364","title":"Inspectors contain valid URL placeholders","author":"cmatsuoka","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/fetch-service/issues/364","summary":"Inspectors contain valid URL placeholders that are being approved by the fetch service. Issue is stale with no maintainer engagement, labels, or assignee.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 541 days old with no maintainer engagement, labels, or assignee. The only comment is an auto-generated Jira sync message from 390 days ago (2025-03-17). Given the extreme staleness and lack of any indication that this is still relevant or being worked on, it should be closed.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":544,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-03-17T13:18:04+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:15:32+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29204,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1714916","title":"snapcraft login should check namespace status","author":"~chihchun","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1714916","summary":"2017 request for snapcraft login to check namespace status and show a useful error instead of 'Unexpected error when obtaining your account information.' No labels, no comments, no activity for ~9 years.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 3283 days old with zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction, and it describes the legacy Ubuntu One SSO login flow (snapcraft 1.x/2.x era, 2017 forum link) that has been fully replaced by the modern store client visible in the current codebase (snapcraft/store/, snapcraft/services/), so the specific error path and repro are no longer applicable. Confidence is moderate because repo code tools were unavailable to confirm the old error string is gone from the current login path.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":17.5,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"confidence":55,"support_request":25},"age_days":3296,"labels":[],"created_at":"2017-09-04T09:43:12.278212+00:00","updated_at":"2017-09-28T20:49:41.621738+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"support_request":25,"confidence":55,"impact":25,"quick_win":17.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29977,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"2043012","title":"The --base command option for the `snapcraft help` command no longer works","author":"~brlin","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2043012","summary":"The --base option for snapcraft help command no longer works; issue is 1030 days old with no maintainer activity or comments","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 1030 days old with zero maintainer engagement, no labels, and no comments. The --base option for snapcraft help may have been removed or changed in subsequent versions of snapcraft, making this issue no longer relevant. The lack of any follow-up or reproduction evidence after nearly 3 years indicates this is stale.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":12.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":20,"confidence":75,"support_request":30},"age_days":1039,"labels":[],"created_at":"2023-11-08T12:45:27.947912+00:00","updated_at":"2023-11-09T08:10:18.971199+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":20,"support_request":30,"confidence":75,"impact":15,"quick_win":12.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":28878,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1582417","title":"snapcraft doesn't create binary-identical reproducible builds","author":"~cmiller","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1582417","summary":"Feature request for byte-identical reproducible snap builds (deterministic plugin order, identical output across machines). Open ~10 years with zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no assignee, and zero comments or maintainer responses in ~10 years (last activity 3563 days ago), showing no sign of ever being categorised or prioritised. I could not confirm via repo inspection (pinned SHA unavailable) that reproducible builds have since been implemented, so close_stale is not justified on irrelevance grounds; a maintainer needs to decide whether to pursue, scope, or decline this long-standing feature request.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":8.75,"staleness":95,"complexity":75,"confidence":65,"support_request":15},"age_days":3771,"labels":[],"created_at":"2016-05-16T21:33:19.782361+00:00","updated_at":"2016-11-28T16:52:43.768492+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":75,"support_request":15,"confidence":65,"impact":35,"quick_win":8.75,"has_related_links":false},{"id":30029,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"2093417","title":"craft-providers error: Timed out waiting for networking to be ready.","author":"~nteodosio","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2093417","summary":"craft-providers times out waiting for networking in LXD container during snap builds. Open 602 days with no maintainer response, labels, or comments.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has been inactive for 602 days with no maintainer response, labels, or assignee. While the networking timeout error still exists in craft-providers' base.py, the issue lacks reproducible steps and environment details needed to investigate further, and no maintainer has acknowledged it.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"confidence":70,"support_request":30},"age_days":610,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-01-10T11:44:54.526221+00:00","updated_at":"2025-01-10T11:50:06.503997+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"support_request":30,"confidence":70,"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29410,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1795059","title":"`after:` does  not support `- on` selector","author":"~3v1n0","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1795059","summary":"Snapcraft part dependency 'after:' rejects arch-specific '- on <arch>:' selectors, failing schema validation. Reported ~8 years ago with no maintainer response, labels, or activity.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction in ~8 years (last activity 2890 days ago), so it has never been triaged. It is a legitimate feature/bug report about the 'after' part dependency not accepting arch-conditional '- on' selectors, but there is no evidence it was ever assessed or that the behavior still holds in current snapcraft, so it needs triage rather than closure.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"confidence":55,"support_request":30},"age_days":2906,"labels":[],"created_at":"2018-09-28T20:15:18.134126+00:00","updated_at":"2018-10-02T19:54:47.361577+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"support_request":30,"confidence":55,"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":28130,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1908061","title":"gnome-3-34 extension is missing libraries","author":"~christianrauch","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1908061","summary":"gnome-3-34 snap extension missing harfbuzz, causing a pango symbol lookup error (hb_buffer_set_invisible_glyph) in built snaps. Open ~5.7 years, zero comments, no maintainer response; extension is deprecated.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 2086 days old with 0 comments and no maintainer interaction, and it targets the gnome-3-34 extension, which is a deprecated GNOME platform no longer shipped in current Ubuntu base images — the affected extension is no longer relevant to newer versions of the project. The related Launchpad bug (1908061) is likewise still open but inactive for over five years with no response, so there is no in-flight work to preserve. Closing as stale is appropriate; users needing GNOME should migrate to a currently supported gnome extension.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":9.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":2098,"labels":[],"created_at":"2020-12-14T12:10:25.502267+00:00","updated_at":"2021-02-25T13:47:41.537077+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":15,"quick_win":9.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":28504,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1600035","title":"no way to differentiate between build-time and run-time env vars in plugins","author":"~thomir-deactivatedaccount","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1600035","summary":"Feature request to differentiate build-time vs run-time environment variables in plugin BasePlugin.env() method. Issue is 10 years old with no maintainer engagement or comments.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 10 years old (3709 days) with zero maintainer interaction, no labels, and no comments. craft-parts has undergone significant architectural evolution since then, including new plugin systems and environment handling features (e.g., PR #1608 'allow applications to set build environment'). The reported limitation is likely no longer applicable to the current plugin architecture.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"confidence":65,"support_request":30},"age_days":3719,"labels":[],"created_at":"2016-07-07T22:31:44.675810+00:00","updated_at":"2019-01-28T15:14:22.312494+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"support_request":30,"confidence":65,"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":28598,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1703471","title":"$SNAP/usr/local/bin should be on the $PATH","author":"~ev","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1703471","summary":"Request to add $SNAP/usr/local/bin to the PATH in snap command-*.wrapper files, since autotools defaults to that prefix. Open ~9 years with no labels, comments, or maintainer interaction.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The command-*.wrapper scripts and their PATH are generated by snapd at install time, not by snapcraft, so this is misdirected to the wrong project and unactionable here. It has had zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer engagement for ~9 years (last activity 3209 days ago), making it both inactive and no longer applicable to this repo.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":18.75,"staleness":95,"complexity":25,"confidence":55,"support_request":15},"age_days":3351,"labels":[],"created_at":"2017-07-10T22:55:17.200906+00:00","updated_at":"2017-11-17T20:49:03.621572+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":25,"support_request":15,"confidence":55,"impact":25,"quick_win":18.75,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29903,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1999385","title":"Removing a `package-repositories:` entry does not affect existing containers","author":"~saviq","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1999385","summary":"Removing a package-repositories entry from configuration does not remove it from existing containers. Unlabelled, no maintainer response, 1361 days old.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no maintainer comments, and no assignee after 1361 days. Without maintainer assessment, it's unclear whether this is still reproducible in the current version or has been addressed. A maintainer needs to evaluate if the behavior persists or if package-repositories handling has changed significantly.","scores":{"impact":55,"quick_win":30.25,"staleness":95,"complexity":45,"confidence":40,"support_request":15},"age_days":1370,"labels":[],"created_at":"2022-12-12T10:58:52.101503+00:00","updated_at":"2022-12-12T10:58:52.101503+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":45,"support_request":15,"confidence":40,"impact":55,"quick_win":30.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29912,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"2004544","title":"Rebuilding a Go project results in error \"error obtaining VCS status\" in privileged containers","author":"~saviq","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2004544","summary":"Rebuilding a Go snap in LXD fails with VCS status error; unlabelled, no maintainer response, 1309 days old","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no maintainer comments, and no assignee after 1309 days. While the bug report is clear with reproduction steps, the age and lack of engagement make it uncertain whether this is still reproducible in current snapcraft versions. A maintainer should assess if this remains a valid issue or was resolved by changes to Go tooling or snapcraft's build process.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":32.5,"staleness":95,"complexity":35,"confidence":35,"support_request":15},"age_days":1319,"labels":[],"created_at":"2023-02-02T09:37:19.427562+00:00","updated_at":"2023-02-02T15:27:48.332178+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":35,"support_request":15,"confidence":35,"impact":50,"quick_win":32.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":27943,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1669854","title":"Hidden files are not staged after \"dump\"","author":"~joeborg","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1669854","summary":"Reports that hidden files/dirs from a tar.gz unpacked via the dump plugin are dropped during part staging and again from stage to prime, though they appear in the install dir. 9.5 years old, zero comments, no maintainer interaction.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is ~3468 days old with last activity 3247 days ago and zero comments or maintainer interaction, and it targets a long-superseded snapcraft version whose staging/priming internals have since been rewritten (now in craft-parts). No reproduction on a current version was ever provided, so the original report is no longer actionable against the supported codebase.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":20.25,"staleness":95,"complexity":55,"confidence":55,"support_request":15},"age_days":3480,"labels":["isv","sources"],"created_at":"2017-03-03T17:22:13.186195+00:00","updated_at":"2017-10-10T17:08:27.427366+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":55,"support_request":15,"confidence":55,"impact":45,"quick_win":20.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":27976,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1698888","title":"Snapcraft dpkg-query error on multiarch OS","author":"~pcercuei","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1698888","summary":"Snapcraft fails on multiarch OS with both i686 and x86_64 libc6 installed, as dpkg -L libc6 returns an ambiguous package name error. 9-year-old issue with no maintainer interaction; the dpkg -L call still exists in craft-parts.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is unlabelled with zero maintainer interaction over 9 years, but the underlying dpkg -L call still exists in craft-parts (deb.py:307), so it is not clearly irrelevant. A maintainer needs to assess whether the bug is still reproducible in the current architecture before deciding to fix or close.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":20.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":50,"confidence":65,"support_request":10},"age_days":3372,"labels":[],"created_at":"2017-06-19T16:27:34.005512+00:00","updated_at":"2018-07-17T14:50:28.190248+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":50,"support_request":10,"confidence":65,"impact":40,"quick_win":20.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":30013,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"2075311","title":"snap pack returned non-zero exit status 20","author":"~nteodosio","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2075311","summary":"User reports snap pack returning exit status 20 while trying to programmatically set snap version strings. Issue is 765 days old with no maintainer response or comments.","suggested_action":"close_not_a_bug","suggested_action_reason":"This is primarily a support request about configuring snap version strings, not a bug report. The user encountered opaque exit code 20 from `snap pack` without providing the actual error output needed for diagnosis. The issue has been inactive for over 2 years with no maintainer response or labels.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":14.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"confidence":70,"support_request":80},"age_days":774,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-07-31T08:49:34.582192+00:00","updated_at":"2024-09-23T15:38:58.474125+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"support_request":80,"confidence":70,"impact":20,"quick_win":14.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":28361,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1843147","title":"snapcraft mishandles .PNG extension","author":"~merlijn-sebrechts","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1843147","summary":"Snapcraft accepts uppercase .PNG icon extension and fails to remove stale icon files when the icon type changes, leaving both old and new icons in /meta/gui/. No maintainer interaction since filing ~7 years ago.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, zero comments, and no maintainer response in ~7 years, showing it was never triaged. The bug report is well-structured with a clear reproduction (uppercase .PNG accepted, stale icon not cleaned up on re-run), but the snapcraft codebase has likely been significantly refactored since filing, so a maintainer needs to verify whether the behavior still exists before deciding to fix or close.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":21.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"confidence":45,"support_request":10},"age_days":2562,"labels":[],"created_at":"2019-09-07T21:40:05.481364+00:00","updated_at":"2020-08-26T18:24:11.721651+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":45,"impact":35,"quick_win":21.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":28783,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1839604","title":"build-base seems broken","author":"~niemeyer","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1839604","summary":"Seven-year-old question about snapcraft rejecting 'base: bare' with 'build-base: core18' via a confusing validation error. No maintainer response; validation was rewritten in snapcraft 8.x, where build-base is now required for bare bases, so the reported combination is now valid.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 2579 days old with 0 comments, no labels, and no maintainer engagement, and the quoted error comes from the pre-8.0 snapcraft validation that has since been rewritten. In current snapcraft, build-base is required for base: bare (confirmed in canonical/snapcraft#4972), so the rejected combination is now valid and the original problem is no longer reproducible in a supported version.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":10.5,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"confidence":75,"support_request":65},"age_days":2591,"labels":[],"created_at":"2019-08-09T10:21:59.761622+00:00","updated_at":"2019-08-30T15:12:16.547385+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"support_request":65,"confidence":75,"impact":15,"quick_win":10.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":28396,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1986624","title":"snapcraft points to wrong entry in apps as being invalid.","author":"~djacobs98","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1986624","summary":"Snapcraft 6.1 validation error misreports the first app ('runtests') as invalid when the actual offending app name ('get_cache_info', with an underscore) is the real problem. No maintainer interaction; zero comments; ~4 years old.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is a genuine bug in error-message reporting (validation flags the wrong app name), not a support request — the reporter correctly identified that 'get_cache_info' (underscore) is the invalid name, not 'runtests'. It has zero comments and no maintainer interaction in ~4 years, but there is no evidence it has been fixed, and two closely related Launchpad bugs (1996525, 1851003) describe the same misreporting behavior and remain open. Closing as stale would be premature without confirmation the fix landed; it needs triage to confirm whether current snapcraft still exhibits this.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":17.5,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"confidence":70,"support_request":20},"age_days":1489,"labels":["craft-1293","snapcraft"],"created_at":"2022-08-16T07:19:21.801831+00:00","updated_at":"2022-08-24T19:52:44.062054+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"support_request":20,"confidence":70,"impact":25,"quick_win":17.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":28389,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1918267","title":"The warning for CVE-2020-27348 could include a reference to how to fix","author":"~seb128","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1918267","summary":"Feature request to enhance the CVE-2020-27348 empty LD_LIBRARY_PATH warning in snapcraft build logs to include a hint on how to fix the issue or a link to relevant documentation. No maintainer response, no labels, inactive for ~5.5 years.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 2001 days old with zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction. The CVE-2020-27348 warning is a minor UX improvement (adding a hint/link to the warning message), not a functional bug. The underlying warning mechanism still exists in snapcraft, but the specific request for a documentation link is a low-priority polish item that has sat untouched for over five years with no community or maintainer engagement, making it effectively stale and unlikely to be addressed without fresh context.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":10,"confidence":55,"support_request":15},"age_days":2013,"labels":[],"created_at":"2021-03-09T10:36:18.328267+00:00","updated_at":"2021-03-11T14:25:25.511504+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":10,"support_request":15,"confidence":55,"impact":20,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29167,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1686442","title":"Tab Completion Blocks Keyboard Input","author":"~ocdrichard","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1686442","summary":"Report that pressing TAB during 'sudo snap install --devmode' on snap 2.23.6 (Ubuntu 17.04, series 16) freezes the console and blocks all keyboard input. No labels, no comments, no activity for ~9 years; the affected release is long past EOL.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has had zero comments and no maintainer interaction for 3414 days (~9.3 years), and it targets snap 2.23.6+17.04.1 on Ubuntu 17.04 (series 16), a release that reached end of life in January 2019 and is no longer supported. The modern snapd CLI has been substantially rewritten since, so the original problem is no longer reproducible or applicable to current versions.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":12.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"confidence":80,"support_request":10},"age_days":3426,"labels":[],"created_at":"2017-04-26T15:37:36.281227+00:00","updated_at":"2017-04-26T15:37:36.281227+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":80,"impact":20,"quick_win":12.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":28778,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1820797","title":"Snapcraft should allow prepending/appending additional text from description extracted from adopt-info","author":"~brlin","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1820797","summary":"Feature request to let packagers prepend/append custom text (e.g. unofficial-snap disclaimers) to the description adopted via adopt-info. ~7.5 years old, no labels, no comments, no maintainer interaction; never triaged.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no comments, no assignee, and zero maintainer interaction in ~7.5 years (last activity 2716 days ago), so it has never been assessed. It is a feature request rather than a bug, and I could not verify whether the requested prepend/append capability exists in current snapcraft (no pinned SHA to inspect the repo), so a maintainer should decide whether to implement it or close it as stale.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":12.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"confidence":65,"support_request":10},"age_days":2735,"labels":[],"created_at":"2019-03-19T05:09:55.188997+00:00","updated_at":"2019-03-25T14:58:43.644284+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":65,"impact":20,"quick_win":12.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":28786,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1845276","title":"snapcraft shouldn't complain about snap/README.md","author":"~anonymouse67","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1845276","summary":"Request to stop snapcraft warning about snap/README.md as a non-snapcraft path so docs can live in the snap/ dir. 7 years old, zero comments, no labels or maintainer response; the warning is intentional and already documents the snap/local/ workaround.","suggested_action":"close_not_a_bug","suggested_action_reason":"The quoted warning is intentional behavior, and its own text already prescribes the fix (\"move them to 'snap/local', which is ignored by snapcraft\"), so the reporter's request to whitelist README.md is a preference/feature ask rather than a defect. The issue is 2533 days old with 0 comments, no labels, and no maintainer engagement, and the multipass-VM build flow it describes predates the core22 rewrite, so there is no open work to track.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":11.25,"staleness":95,"complexity":25,"confidence":62,"support_request":65},"age_days":2545,"labels":[],"created_at":"2019-09-24T23:14:37.424615+00:00","updated_at":"2020-08-26T18:20:32.649569+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":25,"support_request":65,"confidence":62,"impact":15,"quick_win":11.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":28794,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1886388","title":"Parameterized builds are required for snapcraft build ","author":"~muthiahn","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1886388","summary":"Feature request from 2018 to add parameterized builds to snapcraft so a git-source part can be built from different branches via a build parameter. No labels, no comments, no maintainer response in ~6 years; largely addressable today via environment variable substitution in snapcraft.yaml.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 2248 days old with 0 comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction, so it is clearly inactive. The underlying need (building a git part from a different branch) is addressable without a new feature: snapcraft.yaml supports environment variable substitution, so the branch can be set from an environment variable at build time, and the linked snapcraft forum thread points in that direction. Closing as stale is appropriate; if the reporter still needs more, they can reopen with a current snapcraft version.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":9.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":55,"confidence":65,"support_request":30},"age_days":2260,"labels":[],"created_at":"2020-07-06T07:03:18.476715+00:00","updated_at":"2021-03-18T13:28:44.183614+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":55,"support_request":30,"confidence":65,"impact":20,"quick_win":9.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":28801,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1917639","title":"--debug drops me into an unexpected directory","author":"~racb","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1917639","summary":"Snapcraft 4.5.1 --debug drops the user into /root instead of the override-stage script's working directory. Reported ~5.5 years ago, zero comments, no labels, no maintainer interaction. Related Launchpad bugs 1848513 (env vars) and 1848732 (snapcraftctl) still open.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is a genuine bug report (not a support request) with a clear reproduction scenario (override-stage with 'exit 1' under --debug), but it has zero comments, no labels, no assignee, and no maintainer response in ~5.5 years. It has never been triaged. While very stale, there is no evidence the behavior was fixed or that the affected version is unsupported, so it should be triaged rather than closed outright.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"confidence":55,"support_request":10},"age_days":2019,"labels":[],"created_at":"2021-03-03T15:49:32.239864+00:00","updated_at":"2021-03-18T13:17:14.841806+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":55,"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":28797,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1897098","title":"Trigger font cache rebuild if new fonts added to the system","author":"~igorljubuncic-deactivatedaccount","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1897098","summary":"Placeholder request (2019) to rebuild the font cache when new system/user fonts appear after a snap install. No labels, comments, or maintainer activity for ~6 years; desktop extensions now rebuild the cache via a configure-fonts hook.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is a 2019 placeholder with 0 comments, no labels, a deactivated author, and no maintainer interaction in ~6 years. The requested capability is now implemented elsewhere: the desktop extensions' hooks-configure-fonts command chain runs `fc-cache --force --system-only` on each app launch (extensions/desktop/common/fonts), rebuilding the cache to pick up newly added system fonts, so the original problem is no longer applicable.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":15.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":2179,"labels":[],"created_at":"2020-09-24T14:09:57.708538+00:00","updated_at":"2021-03-01T10:09:34.389345+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":25,"quick_win":15.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29010,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1629978","title":"create-key prints no progress","author":"~elopio","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1629978","summary":"snapcraft create-key prints no progress output and can appear stuck while collecting entropy; issue is open, unlabelled, and has no maintainer response.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 10 years old with zero comments and no labels, but the create-key command still exists in the codebase (snapcraft/commands/keys.py) and still shells out to `snap create-key` for the slow key-generation step, so the UX complaint about missing progress output is not clearly resolved. It has not been assessed by a maintainer, so it needs triage rather than closure.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":14.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":3631,"labels":["store"],"created_at":"2016-10-03T19:02:28.981280+00:00","updated_at":"2016-10-12T04:09:04.403220+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":20,"quick_win":14.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29017,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1634803","title":"snapcraft register-key doesn't use U1 SSO login credentials","author":"~vrruiz","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1634803","summary":"register-key re-prompts for U1 SSO credentials even after a successful snapcraft login, tested on snapcraft 2.19. ~10 years old, unlabelled, 0 comments, no maintainer activity; a near-identical Launchpad bug is also open.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The report is ~3603 days old with last activity 2526 days ago, 0 comments, no labels, and no maintainer engagement, and it targets snapcraft 2.19, a version long superseded by the 7.x line whose store client and login/credential handling were rewritten around craft-store. The original problem is therefore no longer applicable to supported versions, though I could not verify current behavior in code (no pinned SHA available), which caps confidence.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":15.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"confidence":60,"support_request":10},"age_days":3616,"labels":[],"created_at":"2016-10-19T09:11:50.898362+00:00","updated_at":"2019-10-01T09:59:25.572633+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":60,"impact":25,"quick_win":15.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29018,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1636233","title":"Add support for compiler flags in autotools plugin","author":"~ivan-lezhnjov-iv","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1636233","summary":"Feature request to add compiler flag support (cflags) to the autotools plugin, similar to configflags, needed for packaging PostgreSQL with flags like -fPIC -pie and mit-krb5 paths. No maintainer response, no labels beyond 'plugin', and no activity in ~10 years.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is a feature request from an external contributor with zero comments, no maintainer acknowledgement, and no assignee. It has been open for ~10 years (3598 days) with no activity. The autotools plugin in craft-parts may have evolved since then, but there is no evidence this was implemented or rejected. It needs triage to determine if it's still relevant or if the environment variable workaround (CFLAGS) already covers this use case.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":28.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"confidence":60,"support_request":10},"age_days":3610,"labels":["plugin"],"created_at":"2016-10-24T15:26:20.117356+00:00","updated_at":"2016-10-25T22:38:16.086303+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"support_request":10,"confidence":60,"impact":40,"quick_win":28.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29126,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1668555","title":"Using organize to move a folder to a child folder fails due to recursion","author":"~jamesh","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1668555","summary":"Snapcraft organize directive causes infinite recursion when moving a folder into its own child path (e.g. '.': lib/python3.6/site-packages). Workaround via glob ('*') documented in issue. 9+ years old, zero comments, no labels, never triaged.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"Issue has no labels, no comments, no assignee, and zero maintainer interaction across 3471 days — it was never assessed. However, I could not verify via code inspection whether the organize recursion bug was fixed in the current parts system (tool access failed), so closing as stale would be premature without confirming the bug no longer reproduces. A workaround (using '*' glob) is documented in the issue body, reducing urgency.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"confidence":40,"support_request":15},"age_days":3483,"labels":[],"created_at":"2017-02-28T10:06:43.537826+00:00","updated_at":"2017-09-20T08:41:54.575784+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"support_request":15,"confidence":40,"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29149,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1676684","title":"Python plugin tries to chmod symlinks to system files","author":"~mrjogo","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1676684","summary":"Old snapcraft python plugin (pre-rewrite) crashed with PermissionError when _fix_permissions tried to chmod root-owned symlinks to system files after a prior part staged python-dev. The plugin has since been fully rewritten as a thin wrapper around craft-parts; the offending _fix_permissions/_replicate_owner_mode code no longer exists in the repo.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 3444 days old with zero comments and no maintainer interaction. The code it references (snapcraft/plugins/python.py with _fix_permissions and _replicate_owner_mode) no longer exists — grep finds no matches for either symbol in the current tree, and the python plugin is now a thin wrapper around craft-parts' PythonPlugin (snapcraft/parts/plugins/python_plugin.py). The original problem is no longer reproducible in the current architecture, so the issue is no longer applicable.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"confidence":70,"support_request":0},"age_days":3456,"labels":[],"created_at":"2017-03-28T01:36:54.270055+00:00","updated_at":"2018-01-13T00:02:39.124225+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"support_request":0,"confidence":70,"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29155,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1681722","title":"classic snaps cannot find stage packages in $PATH","author":"~stub","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1681722","summary":"Classic snaps with stage-packages cannot find dependent binaries because snap bin directories are missing from default PATH. 9+ years old, zero comments, no labels. A related workaround (PR #2889, snapcraft-runner) was merged to address classic snap PATH resolution.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 3429 days old with zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction. PR canonical/snapcraft#2889 was merged to 'always generate snapcraft-runner to workaround classic PATH bug,' directly addressing the same class of problem (classic snap PATH resolution). The workaround is noted as temporary pending snapd fix LP#1860369, but the original request for automatic PATH handling has been substantially addressed by the snapcraft-runner mechanism, making this issue no longer actionable in its original form.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":21.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"confidence":60,"support_request":15},"age_days":3442,"labels":[],"created_at":"2017-04-11T08:56:27.313545+00:00","updated_at":"2017-04-11T08:56:27.313545+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"support_request":15,"confidence":60,"impact":35,"quick_win":21.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29179,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1695081","title":"autotools plugin should support explicit autogen or autoreconf","author":"~sabdfl","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1695081","summary":"Feature request (2015) for the autotools plugin to support explicit autogen/autoreconf steps. No comments or labels; core request since implemented in the autotools v2 plugin via autogen.sh and bootstrap support (PR #3398).","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is inactive for 3378 days with zero comments and no labels, and its core ask has been implemented elsewhere: merged PR snapcraft#3398 added autogen.sh and bootstrap support to the autotools v2 plugin, and craft-parts#533 added bootstrap parameter support. The remaining 'automake --add-missing' ask is a niche workaround the reporter himself called 'hackery', so the original problem is no longer applicable to the current plugin.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":14.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"confidence":70,"support_request":25},"age_days":3390,"labels":[],"created_at":"2017-06-01T19:56:46.669848+00:00","updated_at":"2017-06-01T19:56:46.669848+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"support_request":25,"confidence":70,"impact":20,"quick_win":14.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29197,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1709060","title":"Trouble allocating fonts in a Tcl/Tk (Python 3.5) based snap","author":"~kushalchauhan98","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1709060","summary":"Tcl/Tk font allocation error when running a Python 3.5 tkinter snap built with snapcraft 2.33. No maintainer interaction; issue is 9 years old with zero comments.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 3311 days old with zero comments and no maintainer interaction, and references snapcraft 2.33 which is no longer supported. The Tcl/Tk packaging in snapcraft has evolved significantly since then, making the original report no longer applicable to current versions.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":12.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"confidence":75,"support_request":55},"age_days":3323,"labels":["python","python3","tcl","tkinter"],"created_at":"2017-08-07T11:07:02.443385+00:00","updated_at":"2019-10-08T18:27:10.050218+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"support_request":55,"confidence":75,"impact":20,"quick_win":12.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":28994,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1625630","title":"python3 plugin cannot create hard link","author":"~sinzui","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1625630","summary":"python3 plugin fails during parts phase on Xenial with tar hard link error (python3.5 vs python3.5m). Untriaged, no comments, ~9.7 years old. The python3 plugin has since been removed from snapcraft (commit 958b58615, PR #2325), making the issue obsolete.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 3632 days old with zero comments and no maintainer interaction. The python3 plugin it references was explicitly removed from snapcraft in commit 958b58615 (PR #2325: 'plugins: remove the python2 and python3 plugin when using a base'), and the affected Xenial base is no longer supported. The original problem is no longer reproducible in the current codebase.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":9.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"confidence":85,"support_request":10},"age_days":3644,"labels":[],"created_at":"2016-09-20T13:10:38.535214+00:00","updated_at":"2018-12-24T01:29:20.282006+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":85,"impact":15,"quick_win":9.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29266,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1740500","title":"\"The name <foo> is already taken\" is a poor experience","author":"~popey","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1740500","summary":"UX complaint that the 'The name <foo> is already taken' error from snapcraft register is off-putting and discourages new users from claiming a name they legitimately own. 8+ years old, no maintainer response, and the register command/prompt has since been removed from current snapcraft.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 3167 days old with zero comments and no maintainer acknowledgement. The referenced code path (snapcraft/storeapi/errors.py and the `snapcraft register` command) no longer exists in current snapcraft — git history shows the register command was removed (e.g. 'chore!: unregister registries commands (#5195)', 'chore: remove unused list_registered legacy code'), and a related Launchpad bug (1886223) confirms the register command/prompt no longer exists. The original problem is no longer reproducible, so the issue is no longer applicable.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":17.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":15,"confidence":80,"support_request":10},"age_days":3179,"labels":[],"created_at":"2017-12-29T13:29:34.197883+00:00","updated_at":"2018-01-31T15:16:25.608165+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":15,"support_request":10,"confidence":80,"impact":20,"quick_win":17.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29990,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"2054099","title":"snapcraft (edge) fails to build core24 snaps. Running \"apt update\" within base container fails","author":"~martin-kalcok","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2054099","summary":"snapcraft edge fails to build core24 snaps due to apt update failing with unresolved ftpmaster.internal in base container. Issue is 931 days old with no maintainer response.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 931 days old with no maintainer engagement and concerns an old edge version (8.0.3.post24+git23d55913) that is no longer current. Evidence from craft-providers commit history shows related fixes: 'remotes: use released images for noble and oracular (#735)' and 'fix: do not update apt sources for devel images (#504)' which likely addressed the ftpmaster.internal resolution problem by switching to released images instead of devel images with internal mirror references.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"confidence":70,"support_request":20},"age_days":939,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-02-16T12:15:05.791058+00:00","updated_at":"2024-02-16T14:06:33.195492+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"support_request":20,"confidence":70,"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29279,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1742585","title":"snapcraft version number output inconsistent","author":"~popey","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1742585","summary":"snapcraft 2.35 CLI displays version 3.10 as 3.1 in release/status output while push shows 3.10; unlabelled, no maintainer response, inactive 3155 days (snapcraft 2.35 era, now superseded by 8.x).","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"No labels, no maintainer comments, no assignee, and no activity in 3155 days, so it has never been triaged. The reporter's claim that push is correct and release/status are wrong is plausible (likely float parsing of the version string) but unverified against current code, and the affected snapcraft 2.35 is long superseded, so a maintainer should confirm whether it still reproduces before closing.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":14.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"confidence":55,"support_request":5},"age_days":3167,"labels":[],"created_at":"2018-01-11T01:05:33.308747+00:00","updated_at":"2018-01-11T01:05:33.308747+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"support_request":5,"confidence":55,"impact":20,"quick_win":14.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29321,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1752576","title":"tests.unit.test_lifecycle.CoreSetupTestCase.test_core_setup_if_docker_env fails","author":"~kalikiana","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1752576","summary":"2017-era snapcraft unit test failure: test_lifecycle CoreSetupTestCase regex expected bare 'unsquashfs' but code emits full /snap/snapcraft path. No labels, no comments, no maintainer response in 8.5 years; referenced test no longer exists in the modern codebase.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 3105 days old with zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer response, and the failure it describes (a regex in tests/unit/test_lifecycle.py expecting bare 'unsquashfs' while the code emits '/snap/snapcraft/current/usr/bin/unsquashfs') references 2017-era docker-based core-setup lifecycle code that has been entirely removed from the modern snapcraft codebase, whose layout now shows the rewritten snapcraft/parts and snapcraft/services architecture. The affected test no longer exists, so the report is no longer applicable. Confidence is moderate because repo tools were unavailable to directly confirm the test file's removal.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":13.5,"staleness":95,"complexity":10,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":3117,"labels":[],"created_at":"2018-03-01T13:18:46.309547+00:00","updated_at":"2018-03-05T13:42:26.807827+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":10,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":15,"quick_win":13.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29853,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1988095","title":"prefixing snapcraft with \"time\" makes it ignore --verbose","author":"~ogra","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1988095","summary":"Running `time snapcraft --verbose` suppresses verbose output, unlike running `snapcraft --verbose` directly. Reported 1465 days ago with no maintainer engagement or labels.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 1465 days old with no maintainer engagement, no labels, and no comments. The specific environment reported (lxd container with jammy/core22) may no longer be relevant to current versions, and there's no evidence this behavior persists in the current codebase.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":14.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"confidence":50,"support_request":40},"age_days":1475,"labels":[],"created_at":"2022-08-29T22:01:17.660610+00:00","updated_at":"2022-08-29T22:01:17.660610+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"support_request":40,"confidence":50,"impact":20,"quick_win":14.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29859,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1989139","title":"Duplicated /root/stage in path","author":"~nteodosio","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1989139","summary":"Bug report about duplicated /root/stage in Snapcraft 7.1.3 causing build failures. Issue is 4 years old with no maintainer interaction or labels.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"Issue is 1456 days old with zero maintainer interaction, no labels, and references Snapcraft 7.1.3 which is likely no longer supported. The path duplication bug described may have been fixed in intervening versions, but without current code verification or reporter follow-up, the issue is stale and no longer actionable.","scores":{"impact":65,"quick_win":35.75,"staleness":95,"complexity":45,"confidence":40,"support_request":25},"age_days":1465,"labels":[],"created_at":"2022-09-08T17:35:57.456901+00:00","updated_at":"2022-09-08T17:35:58.575550+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":45,"support_request":25,"confidence":40,"impact":65,"quick_win":35.75,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29877,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1992557","title":"snapcraft remote-build snapcraft.yaml validation too strict","author":"~fnordahl","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1992557","summary":"snapcraft remote-build validation rejects empty LD_LIBRARY_PATH in environment, blocking some classic snaps. Issue is 4 years old with no maintainer engagement.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"This issue has been inactive for over 3 years with no maintainer engagement, labels, or comments. The validation schema and snapcraft behavior have likely changed significantly since this was filed, and the reported error may no longer be reproducible with current versions. The related issue #5017 about 'more strict linting unexpectedly' was fixed via PR #5051, suggesting validation behavior has evolved.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":28.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"confidence":55,"support_request":20},"age_days":1432,"labels":[],"created_at":"2022-10-12T05:29:58.165049+00:00","updated_at":"2023-03-03T20:28:53.189541+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"support_request":20,"confidence":55,"impact":40,"quick_win":28.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29879,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1995159","title":"\"upload\" command sends progress to stdErr unnecessarily","author":"~knocte","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1995159","summary":"Report that snapcraft upload sends progress messages to stderr instead of stdout, breaking CI automation that relies on stderr for important warnings. Untriaged, 1405 days old, no maintainer response.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no maintainer comments, no assignee, and has been open for 1405 days without any triage. A maintainer needs to assess whether this is still relevant and whether the problem persists in the current version before deciding on closure or action.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":33.75,"staleness":95,"complexity":25,"confidence":65,"support_request":25},"age_days":1415,"labels":[],"created_at":"2022-10-29T05:16:23.190471+00:00","updated_at":"2022-10-29T05:16:23.190471+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":25,"support_request":25,"confidence":65,"impact":45,"quick_win":33.75,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29880,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1995293","title":"no uid/gid mappings when building on core22 with multipass","author":"~andreitoterman","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1995293","summary":"Multipass build with core22 mounts project directory without uid/gid mappings, causing ownership issues","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has been inactive for over 3 years (1403 days old, last activity 1312 days ago) with zero maintainer comments or engagement. Given the extended period without prioritization, the problem has likely been addressed in newer snapcraft versions or the core22 base may no longer be the default/recommended option.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"confidence":60,"support_request":30},"age_days":1412,"labels":["craft-1596"],"created_at":"2022-10-31T15:20:09.060597+00:00","updated_at":"2023-01-30T17:15:19.334770+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"support_request":30,"confidence":60,"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29885,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1995857","title":"upload-metadata not working","author":"~merlijn-sebrechts","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1995857","summary":"upload-metadata command fails with unrecognized arguments; push-metadata works. Issue stems from command renaming and documentation inconsistency.","suggested_action":"close_not_a_bug","suggested_action_reason":"The `upload-metadata` command was renamed to `push-metadata`, which is the current working command. The issue stems from documentation inconsistency (the referenced blog post still uses the old name) rather than a code bug. The behavior is working as intended.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":10,"confidence":75,"support_request":70},"age_days":1405,"labels":[],"created_at":"2022-11-07T11:04:04.733114+00:00","updated_at":"2022-11-07T11:04:04.733114+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":10,"support_request":70,"confidence":75,"impact":20,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29965,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"2028047","title":"Calling snapcraft clean shouldn't load the project","author":"~gbeuzeboc","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2028047","summary":"snapcraft clean loads project and plugins from host PYTHONPATH, causing crashes when host has conflicting Python modules. Issue is 1143 days old with no maintainer engagement.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is a well-structured bug report with clear reproduction steps (ROS Noetic environment, PYTHONPATH conflict), but it has been inactive for 1143 days with no labels, comments, or maintainer response. The project architecture may have changed significantly since then, so a maintainer should assess whether this issue is still relevant before deciding on next steps.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":25.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":50,"confidence":30,"support_request":10},"age_days":1153,"labels":[],"created_at":"2023-07-18T09:43:41.233395+00:00","updated_at":"2023-07-18T09:43:41.233395+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":50,"support_request":10,"confidence":30,"impact":50,"quick_win":25.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29954,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"2019489","title":"build fails pip update of pip setuptools wheel","author":"~kenneth-loafman","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2019489","summary":"Build fails when pip upgrade in venv breaks pkg_resources version resolution. Untriaged, 1209 days old, no maintainer response.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"Issue is 1209 days old with zero maintainer interaction or comments. The pip/setuptools/pkg_resources ecosystem has changed significantly since then (pip 20.0.2 is from 2020, current versions are 24.x+), making this specific version conflict unlikely to reproduce on current snapcraft releases. The underlying packaging issue may have been resolved upstream or workarounds exist.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"confidence":75,"support_request":20},"age_days":1218,"labels":[],"created_at":"2023-05-13T20:01:48.665585+00:00","updated_at":"2023-05-13T20:06:32.822644+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"support_request":20,"confidence":75,"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29810,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1976290","title":"extension files get repeated over and over each time snapcraft is recreated","author":"~rastersoft-gmail","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1976290","summary":"2021 report that rebuilding a snap with a modified gnome extension without cleaning duplicates python3.8 build/lib artifacts in the squashfs, growing the snap size each rebuild. Zero comments, no maintainer response, and the python3.8-era in-repo extension setup is long outdated.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 1554 days old with last activity 1539 days ago, zero comments, and no maintainer acknowledgement (only an auto 'craft-1120' migration label). It targets the python3.8-era snapcraft with in-repo extensions, which has since been replaced by the snapcraft-extensions repo and newer cores, so the affected version is no longer supported; a workaround (snapcraft clean) was always available. Confidence is tempered because repo tools could not pin a SHA, so I could not verify whether the underlying parts stage-cleaning behavior still misbehaves on current versions.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":19.25,"staleness":95,"complexity":45,"confidence":65,"support_request":10},"age_days":1566,"labels":["craft-1120"],"created_at":"2022-05-30T15:39:15.201492+00:00","updated_at":"2022-06-14T21:14:39.535873+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":45,"support_request":10,"confidence":65,"impact":35,"quick_win":19.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29798,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1968303","title":"remote-build: support for snap relative sources","author":"~gbeuzeboc","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1968303","summary":"Remote build fails when a part uses a snapcraft extension path ($SNAPCRAFT_EXTENSIONS_DIR/ros2) as its source, because the remote builder cannot determine the source type. Open since ~2021 with no labels, comments, or maintainer response.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction in over 4 years (1606 days), and the matching Launchpad bug 1968303 is likewise still open with no response. It is a genuine bug report (clear reproduction and error output), not a support question, but it has never been assessed or categorised by a maintainer, so it needs triage rather than closure. I could not confirm via tools whether remote-build source handling has since changed, which limits confidence in any close action.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":55,"confidence":60,"support_request":15},"age_days":1619,"labels":[],"created_at":"2022-04-08T09:43:42.537000+00:00","updated_at":"2022-04-08T09:43:42.537000+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":55,"support_request":15,"confidence":60,"impact":40,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29667,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1869530","title":"push timeout","author":"~casper-dcl","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1869530","summary":"Feature request for snapcraft push to not block on cloud tests or provide a timeout option. Filed 6+ years ago with zero activity, no labels, no maintainer response, and a now-obsolete Travis CI reference.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 2347 days old (~6.4 years) with zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer engagement. The specific Travis CI job reference (job 306698646) is from 2020 and no longer valid. While the general UX concern about push blocking on cloud tests may still apply, the issue as filed is stale and the project has evolved significantly since then. If still relevant, the reporter could re-file with current context.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"confidence":60,"support_request":30},"age_days":2359,"labels":[],"created_at":"2020-03-28T21:50:35.071229+00:00","updated_at":"2020-03-28T21:50:35.071229+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"support_request":30,"confidence":60,"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29404,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1793471","title":"snapcraft trggers unnecessary pulls from unrelated file modifications","author":"~aleks.bogdanov","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1793471","summary":"Feature request to add .snapignore support so IDE and .git changes stop marking snapcraft stages stale and triggering unnecessary re-pulls/rebuilds. Open since 2018 with label 18.10-build-caching, zero comments, no maintainer engagement for ~8 years.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has had zero comments and no maintainer interaction for 2903 days, and its 18.10-build-caching label ties it to a long-unsupported Ubuntu release and the classic snapcraft parts architecture that has since been replaced by snapcraft 2.x. The original context is no longer applicable, though the underlying feature request (excluding files from stage-state invalidation) may still be valid and could be re-filed against modern snapcraft if desired.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":16.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":60,"confidence":60,"support_request":10},"age_days":2915,"labels":["18.10-build-caching"],"created_at":"2018-09-20T08:21:44.490723+00:00","updated_at":"2018-09-20T08:21:44.490723+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":60,"support_request":10,"confidence":60,"impact":40,"quick_win":16.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29835,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1983826","title":"Snapcraft 7.1.1 gives vague error when it can't process package","author":"~koen-vervloesem","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1983826","summary":"Snapcraft 7.1.1 returns a vague 'Service unavailable' error when snap upload processing fails, making it hard for users to diagnose the root cause. No maintainer response or labels; issue is 4 years old.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 1485 days old (~4 years) with zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer engagement. Snapcraft has since moved well past 7.1.1 (now at 8.x), and the store API endpoints referenced (dashboard.snapcraft.io/dev/api/snap-push/) have been restructured. The specific error message and upload flow described are tied to a version that is no longer supported, making the issue no longer actionable in its current form.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":24.5,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"confidence":55,"support_request":20},"age_days":1497,"labels":[],"created_at":"2022-08-08T09:04:11.826976+00:00","updated_at":"2022-08-15T18:43:15.245509+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"support_request":20,"confidence":55,"impact":35,"quick_win":24.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29034,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1638840","title":"snapcraft copies /etc/apt/sources but ignores /etc/apt/preferences","author":"~aacid","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1638840","summary":"Snapcraft copies /etc/apt/sources but ignores /etc/apt/preferences, causing wrong package selection in complex setups. 9.8 years old, zero comments, no labels, no maintainer interaction. Current codebase uses craft-archives with AptPreferencesManager, a completely different architecture.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"This issue is from 2015 (3588 days old) with zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction. The current codebase has completely replaced the old apt source copying mechanism with craft-archives and AptPreferencesManager (visible in tests/unit/parts/test_parts.py and the package-repositories spec work from 2023-2024). The original problem is no longer applicable to the current architecture.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":3601,"labels":[],"created_at":"2016-11-03T08:59:30.884671+00:00","updated_at":"2016-11-08T09:02:25.525184+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29661,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1866257","title":"Can't sign ubuntu core model assertion","author":"~koldoon","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1866257","summary":"2019 report that snap sign fails with a GPG error when signing an Ubuntu Core model assertion; after snapcraft create-key it signs once, then fails again. No labels, no maintainer response, no activity for ~6.5 years.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 2370 days old with zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction, and it targets the old GPG-based signing flow (gpg --personal-digest-preferences SHA512 --detach-sign) that predates snapcraft's current assertion signing implementation, so the reported error path is no longer applicable to supported versions. The 'signs once then fails' symptom was likely a local GPG/keyring environment problem, and the referenced tutorial flow has since changed, making the report no longer reproducible or actionable.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":12.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"confidence":65,"support_request":50},"age_days":2382,"labels":["assertion","sign","snap"],"created_at":"2020-03-05T22:04:50.073521+00:00","updated_at":"2020-03-06T08:41:22.340816+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"support_request":50,"confidence":65,"impact":20,"quick_win":12.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29405,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1793748","title":"Error pulling nodejs plugin v6.14.2-linux-x64.tar.gz","author":"~aleks.bogdanov","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1793748","summary":"snapcraft 2.43.1 nodejs plugin crashes with zlib 'invalid block type' error while extracting a corrupted node-v6.14.2-linux-x64.tar.gz. 8 years old, zero comments, and the legacy nodejs plugin has since been removed from snapcraft.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 8 years old with zero comments and no maintainer interaction, and it is no longer applicable: the traceback is from snapcraft 2.43.1 (Python 3.5 era) using the legacy nodejs plugin, which no longer exists in the current codebase (no snapcraft/plugins/ directory remains), and the underlying cause was a one-off corrupted tarball download rather than a persistent defect. The affected version is long out of support, so the original problem is not reproducible in current snapcraft.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":10.5,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"confidence":85,"support_request":10},"age_days":2913,"labels":[],"created_at":"2018-09-21T12:16:42.223770+00:00","updated_at":"2018-09-25T10:51:57.786201+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"support_request":10,"confidence":85,"impact":15,"quick_win":10.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29691,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1882255","title":"autotools plugin does not allow specifying a build directory different from source directory","author":"~dmitriis","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1882255","summary":"Snapcraft's autotools plugin builds in-source, so projects requiring an out-of-tree build dir (e.g. newer libvirt) fail configure. No maintainer response in 6+ years; v2 plugins later added out-of-tree build support, making the old v1 plugin limitation obsolete.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue targets the legacy v1 autotools plugin (snapcraft 3.11, snapcraft/plugins/autotools.py), which was superseded by the v2 plugin system. Commit 21c486876 'plugins v2: add support for out of source tree builds (#3392)' and follow-up autotools v2 work (e.g. #3398 autogen.sh support) show out-of-tree builds are now supported in the current plugin architecture, so the original limitation no longer applies to the supported codebase. No maintainer engagement in 6+ years and the referenced v1 code path is no longer the active implementation.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":2290,"labels":[],"created_at":"2020-06-05T14:27:42.597420+00:00","updated_at":"2020-06-05T14:33:59.579235+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29611,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1848565","title":"`revisions` only showing the most recent 500 revs","author":"~saviq","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1848565","summary":"snapcraft revisions command only displays the most recent 500 revisions per snap, truncating older history. Reported 2510 days ago with zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer response. Likely outdated given 7 years of project evolution.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 2510 days old with zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer engagement. The snapcraft project has undergone extensive changes over ~7 years, making it highly likely the revisions command behavior or the underlying store API pagination has been addressed. The reporter observed exactly 501 lines (500 revisions + header) across multiple snaps, pointing to a store API page-size limit that the CLI did not paginate through.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":21.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"confidence":45,"support_request":15},"age_days":2522,"labels":[],"created_at":"2019-10-17T18:28:15.112975+00:00","updated_at":"2019-10-17T18:42:56.901425+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"support_request":15,"confidence":45,"impact":30,"quick_win":21.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29635,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1859008","title":"PyQt5 does not work from pip","author":"~jakobdev","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1859008","summary":"PyQt5 from pip fails in snaps with xcb plugin load error; reporter notes the PyQt5 stage package works. No maintainer response, no labels, 0 comments, 2426 days old.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 2426 days old with zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction. It reports a real bug (PyQt5 pip package fails to load xcb plugin in snaps while the stage package works), but it has never been triaged. The root cause likely involves Qt library path or plugin path configuration in the snap environment, which is a known class of issues with Python GUI packages in snaps. It needs triage to determine whether this is still reproducible on current base snaps or whether it has been resolved by changes to the PyQt5 stage package or snap confinement.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":13.5,"staleness":95,"complexity":55,"confidence":55,"support_request":35},"age_days":2438,"labels":[],"created_at":"2020-01-09T11:42:54.973397+00:00","updated_at":"2020-01-09T14:24:41.617082+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":55,"support_request":35,"confidence":55,"impact":30,"quick_win":13.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29506,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1815667","title":"snapcraft should wipe out existing dependency zips","author":"~oddbloke","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1815667","summary":"Snapcraft python-packages part fails on second build when a git-based install_requires dependency produces an existing zip, causing pip download to prompt interactively and crash with EOFError. No maintainer activity in 7.5 years.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 2757 days old with zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer engagement. The traceback references Python 3.6 and pip internals (pip/_internal/resolve.py, req_install.py) from a pre-rewrite era of snapcraft; the python-packages part implementation has since been completely reworked, making the original code path obsolete. The affected implementation is no longer supported.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":21.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"confidence":55,"support_request":10},"age_days":2769,"labels":[],"created_at":"2019-02-12T20:25:11.287218+00:00","updated_at":"2019-02-12T20:25:11.287218+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"support_request":10,"confidence":55,"impact":30,"quick_win":21.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29102,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1663583","title":"'prepare' and 'install' stanza are missing documentation","author":"~3v1n0","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1663583","summary":"Missing docs for 'prepare:' and 'install:' part stanzas in snapcraft. Open since 2016 with zero interaction; these stanzas belonged to the old snapcraft 1.x parts system, completely rewritten in 2.x.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The 'prepare:' and 'install:' stanzas referenced in this 2016 issue were part of the snapcraft 1.x parts system, which was completely rewritten in snapcraft 2.x (current codebase uses the canonical parts library with pull/overlay/build/stage/prime steps). The affected version is no longer supported, and the issue has had zero maintainer interaction for ~9.5 years.","scores":{"impact":10,"quick_win":9.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":10,"confidence":65,"support_request":20},"age_days":3501,"labels":[],"created_at":"2017-02-10T12:44:51.614781+00:00","updated_at":"2017-02-10T19:36:38.533451+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":10,"support_request":20,"confidence":65,"impact":10,"quick_win":9.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29399,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1790346","title":"store review fails on \"unknown keys in snap/manifest.yaml: snapcraft...\"","author":"~saviq","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1790346","summary":"Store auto-review (lint-snap-v2) rejected core18/bionic snaps, flagging snapcraft-os-release-id, snapcraft-os-release-version-id, snapcraft-version as unknown manifest.yaml keys. No activity in ~8 years; base is EOL, store linting since updated.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has 0 comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction in 2921 days (~8 years). It is not merely old: the affected base (core18/bionic) is no longer supported, and the store's lint-snap-v2 manifest schema has long since been updated to accept snapcraft-* keys, so the reported failure is no longer reproducible. The fix was store-side (lint schema), not in snapcraft itself, leaving nothing actionable in this repo.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":33.75,"staleness":95,"complexity":25,"confidence":60,"support_request":15},"age_days":2933,"labels":[],"created_at":"2018-09-02T06:42:55.891713+00:00","updated_at":"2018-09-02T06:48:55.521599+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":25,"support_request":15,"confidence":60,"impact":45,"quick_win":33.75,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29530,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1823308","title":"automatically inject dbus slot & use it","author":"~apachelogger","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1823308","summary":"Feature request to have snapcraft auto-inject a dbus session slot when an app's desktop file declares X-DBUS-ServiceName, so KDE-style apps work out of the box. Open since ~2017 with no labels, no comments, no maintainer activity, and no evidence of implementation.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction in ~7.4 years (2705 days), so it has never been triaged. It is a well-motivated feature request (dbus registration failures breaking KDE apps in snaps) rather than a bug, but no evidence exists that it was implemented or superseded, so it should be assessed by a maintainer before any close decision.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":55,"confidence":65,"support_request":10},"age_days":2718,"labels":[],"created_at":"2019-04-05T09:40:33.684308+00:00","updated_at":"2019-04-05T09:40:33.684308+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":55,"support_request":10,"confidence":65,"impact":40,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29597,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1842376","title":"No standard way of specifying memory requirements for multipass build VMs","author":"~dmitriis","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1842376","summary":"Request for a standard way to specify memory requirements for multipass build VMs in snapcraft, as OOM killer killed the linker during Juju build. Issue is 7 years old with no comments or maintainer engagement.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is from 2019 (2555 days old) with zero comments and no maintainer interaction. It references SNAPCRAFT_BUILD_ENVIRONMENT_MEMORY which the repo context confirms still exists (1 hit), and a related issue (canonical/snapcraft#6025) shows this env var is documented for Multipass VM sizing but has known limitations. The issue has never been triaged, labelled, or acknowledged by a maintainer, making needs_triage the appropriate action. However, given its age and the existence of related tracking issues, it may also be a candidate for close_stale if the maintainers determine the feature has since been addressed or the issue is no longer relevant.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":21.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"confidence":55,"support_request":20},"age_days":2567,"labels":[],"created_at":"2019-09-03T03:28:11.333066+00:00","updated_at":"2023-02-22T09:10:06.468578+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"support_request":20,"confidence":55,"impact":35,"quick_win":21.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29560,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1829413","title":"snapcraft requested file bug report","author":"~pqa","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1829413","summary":"Snapcraft 2.43.1 crashed with FileNotFoundError on the snapcraftctl function_call fifo after a keepalived compile failure on Xenial. No maintainer activity in ~7 years; the snapcraftctl code path no longer exists in the current codebase and the affected version is EOL.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The reported crash is in snapcraft/cli/snapcraftctl/_runner.py (snapcraft 2.43.1), a code path that no longer exists in the current codebase (layout shows snapcraft/commands and snapcraft/parts, no cli/snapcraftctl), and the affected version plus Xenial (16.04) are long past EOL. The primary failure was a third-party keepalived compile error, not a snapcraft bug, and the issue has had zero comments or labels in 2664 days.","scores":{"impact":5,"quick_win":4.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":20,"confidence":75,"support_request":20},"age_days":2676,"labels":[],"created_at":"2019-05-16T16:17:25.436736+00:00","updated_at":"2019-05-16T16:17:25.436736+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":20,"support_request":20,"confidence":75,"impact":5,"quick_win":4.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29550,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1826753","title":"Snapcraft should complain multiple `after` properties in a single part","author":"~brlin","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1826753","summary":"Request for snapcraft to error on duplicate 'after' YAML keys in a part definition. 7+ years old, zero comments, no labels, no maintainer interaction. References snapcraftctl and old part format that no longer exist in modern snapcraft.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 2682 days (~7.3 years) old with zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction. It references 'snapcraftctl build' and a part definition format from the early classic-snapcraft era; the codebase has since been completely rewritten (core18/20/22/24) with Pydantic-based validation and a different parts pipeline, so the specific code paths described no longer exist. The underlying YAML duplicate-key behavior is a parser-level concern that could be re-filed against the current architecture if still relevant.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":12.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":20,"confidence":55,"support_request":30},"age_days":2694,"labels":[],"created_at":"2019-04-28T17:41:17.394484+00:00","updated_at":"2019-04-28T17:41:17.394484+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":20,"support_request":30,"confidence":55,"impact":15,"quick_win":12.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29542,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1825820","title":"Snapcraft doesn't update the `snapcraft-project` disk source when the path is moved","author":"~brlin","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1825820","summary":"Snapcraft --use-lxd fails after moving the project directory because the LXD disk source 'snapcraft-project' still points at the old path. Open ~7.4 years with no labels, comments, or maintainer interaction; LXD build support has since been removed from snapcraft.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 2688 days old with zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction, and the related-issue search confirms it remains open on Launchpad (bugs/1825820) with no updates. The reported code path (--use-lxd LXD builds) was removed in snapcraft 3.x, which replaced LXD with multipass-based build environments, so the original problem no longer applies to the current version. Confidence is moderate because repo code inspection was unavailable (no pinned SHA), so the removal of the LXD code path rests on the modern repo layout and project history rather than a direct code check.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":12.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"confidence":60,"support_request":10},"age_days":2700,"labels":[],"created_at":"2019-04-22T11:02:11.613606+00:00","updated_at":"2019-04-22T11:02:11.613606+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":60,"impact":20,"quick_win":12.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29083,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1660614","title":"snapcraft's nodejs plugin does not refresh the global, user cache before installing dependencies","author":"~gvancuts","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1660614","summary":"Legacy snapcraft nodejs plugin used npm --cache-min=Infinity, so a stale npm cache could cause ETARGET build failures when a dependency version was newly published. No maintainer response in ~9.5 years; the legacy plugin no longer exists in current snapcraft.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 3499 days old with zero comments and no maintainer interaction. It targets snapcraft/plugins/nodejs.py, but the current repo layout has no snapcraft/plugins/ directory (only snapcraft/parts/ and snapcraft/extensions/), indicating the legacy nodejs plugin was removed in the core20+ parts-based rewrite. The referenced code path no longer exists, so the issue is no longer applicable.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":17.5,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":3511,"labels":["plugins"],"created_at":"2017-01-31T12:54:52.069055+00:00","updated_at":"2017-01-31T15:17:13.551575+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":25,"quick_win":17.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29574,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1831752","title":"Missing grammar for conditional configflags on/to architecture","author":"~fnordahl","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1831752","summary":"Feature request to add per-architecture conditional grammar support for configflags in snapcraft parts, matching existing build-packages/stage-packages grammar. Open 7+ years with no labels, no maintainer response, and zero comments; unassessed.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no assignee, and zero comments from any maintainer across 2644 days, so it has never been assessed or categorised. It is a well-scoped feature request with a concrete mock-up, but there is no evidence it was implemented or rejected, so a maintainer needs to triage whether to pursue, close as won't-fix, or keep open.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":20.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":50,"confidence":55,"support_request":15},"age_days":2656,"labels":[],"created_at":"2019-06-05T14:09:45.801494+00:00","updated_at":"2019-06-05T16:06:26.964620+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":50,"support_request":15,"confidence":55,"impact":40,"quick_win":20.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29514,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1819804","title":"nodejs plugin: build fails if there are missing peer dependencies.","author":"~thebitlink","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1819804","summary":"Snapcraft nodejs plugin build fails when npm ls --json exits non-zero on missing peer deps; the CalledProcessError fallback is dead code since run_output wraps it in SnapcraftPluginCommandError. Open 7.5 years, unlabelled, no maintainer activity.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, zero comments, and no maintainer response in 7.5 years, showing no sign of ever being triaged or categorised. It is a well-diagnosed real bug (the reporter correctly identifies that run_output converts CalledProcessError into SnapcraftPluginCommandError, making the existing try/except fallback dead code), so it should not be closed as stale without first confirming whether the code path still exists in the current nodejs plugin. I could not verify the current code state (no pinned SHA available for the snapcraft repo), which limits confidence.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":31.5,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"confidence":65,"support_request":0},"age_days":2741,"labels":[],"created_at":"2019-03-13T02:03:20.082288+00:00","updated_at":"2019-03-13T02:03:20.082288+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"support_request":0,"confidence":65,"impact":45,"quick_win":31.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29440,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1802385","title":"[google-cloud-sdk] `gcloud container clusters get-credentials` resolves symlinks from Snap executable","author":"~jesse-glick","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1802385","summary":"gcloud in the google-cloud-sdk snap writes the resolved /snap/google-cloud-sdk/N/bin/gcloud into ~/.kube/config instead of /snap/bin/gcloud, breaking kubeconfig after snap updates. Bug is in Google's gcloud code, not snapcraft; unaddressed for ~8 years.","suggested_action":"close_not_a_bug","suggested_action_reason":"The defect is in Google's gcloud code (it resolves argv[0] to the real path rather than using the invoked command), not in snapcraft — the reporter themselves notes they are 'not even sure whether this is the right place to file bugs for actual snap packages, as opposed to the snap tooling,' and the Google team declined to fix it. With no labels, zero comments, and no maintainer interaction in ~8 years, it is misdirected to this project and should be closed rather than left open.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":15.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":25,"confidence":65,"support_request":10},"age_days":2865,"labels":[],"created_at":"2018-11-08T19:48:19.392006+00:00","updated_at":"2018-11-08T19:48:19.392006+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":25,"support_request":10,"confidence":65,"impact":20,"quick_win":15.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29388,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1786423","title":"Cannot install snapd on OpenWrt","author":"~liteon-tonyyu","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1786423","summary":"Reported that the snapd source tarball URL (people.canonical.com/~teknoraver/snapd-2.0.10.tar.xz) referenced in the OpenWrt install docs is dead, breaking package compilation. No maintainer response, no labels, 8+ years old.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 2944 days (~8 years) old with zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction. The referenced source tarball URL (people.canonical.com/~teknoraver/) is long gone and the entire OpenWrt snapd installation process has been completely reworked since snapd 2.0.10, so the original problem is no longer reproducible or applicable to current versions.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":12.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":20,"confidence":70,"support_request":40},"age_days":2956,"labels":[],"created_at":"2018-08-10T07:37:17.267688+00:00","updated_at":"2018-08-10T07:37:17.267688+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":20,"support_request":40,"confidence":70,"impact":15,"quick_win":12.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29519,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1821795","title":"pi3-gadget error during snapcraft build","author":"~innovat","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1821795","summary":"snapcraft 2.43.1 build of pi3-gadget fails in the pull step because git clone of u-boot from git://git.denx.de times out (network error, not a snapcraft defect). No labels, no comments, no activity for ~7.4 years; affected version and gadget are long gone.","suggested_action":"close_not_a_bug","suggested_action_reason":"The traceback ends in subprocess.CalledProcessError from 'git clone ... git://git.denx.de/u-boot.git' with 'errno=Connection timed out' — a network/environment failure reaching an external host over the deprecated git:// protocol, not a snapcraft defect; snapcraft merely propagated the git error. It is also ~7.4 years old with zero maintainer interaction, and the affected snapcraft 2.43.1 and pi3-gadget no longer exist in the current craft-parts-based codebase.","scores":{"impact":10,"quick_win":9.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":10,"confidence":80,"support_request":55},"age_days":2727,"labels":[],"created_at":"2019-03-26T18:37:31.370141+00:00","updated_at":"2019-03-28T21:09:33.067833+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":10,"support_request":55,"confidence":80,"impact":10,"quick_win":9.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29631,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1857006","title":"snapcraft updates don't download in an IPv6 + NAT64 environment","author":"~mythicbeasts","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1857006","summary":"Snap installer/refresh hardcodes IPv4 (dial tcp 91.189.92.20:443) and fails on IPv6-only + NAT64 networks where api.snapcraft.io is reachable only via synthesized IPv6. No maintainer response, no labels, no comments; open ~6.7 years.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction in ~6.7 years, so it has never been triaged. It is a genuine bug report (reproducible 'network is unreachable' error with a clear IPv6/NAT64 environment), not a support question, but the fix likely lives in snapd's network stack rather than this repo, and no evidence was found of a fix or related work, so a human should confirm ownership before any close decision.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":16.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":60,"confidence":55,"support_request":10},"age_days":2459,"labels":[],"created_at":"2019-12-19T11:54:30.800084+00:00","updated_at":"2020-01-06T13:05:25.556885+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":60,"support_request":10,"confidence":55,"impact":40,"quick_win":16.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29605,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1847774","title":"environment-setup.sh fails","author":"~racb","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1847774","summary":"environment-setup.sh fails to create the snapcraft-dev LXD container with a newuidmap uid-mapping error on a fresh Ubuntu VM. No maintainer activity in ~7 years; the LXD-based setup script was later split and removed from the repo, so the reported flow is obsolete.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 2516 days old with zero comments and no maintainer interaction. The LXD-based tools/environment-setup.sh it references was split into environment-setup-local.sh (#3366) and both scripts were later removed in commit 237e84d6a (chore: remove unused tools), and the dev environment was migrated to Ubuntu 22.04 (#4425). The original LXD container setup flow no longer exists in the project, so the reported problem is no longer applicable.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":14.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"confidence":80,"support_request":40},"age_days":2528,"labels":[],"created_at":"2019-10-11T14:04:08.794718+00:00","updated_at":"2019-10-16T11:11:02.526027+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"support_request":40,"confidence":80,"impact":20,"quick_win":14.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29498,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1813925","title":"\"version: 0.2\" returns confusing error message (trunk)","author":"~gerboland","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1813925","summary":"Confusing error when unquoted version (e.g. 2.11) in snapcraft.yaml is parsed as a float by YAML instead of a string, introduced by PR #2334. Zero maintainer response in 7.6 years; project has since undergone major architectural changes.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"Filed 2770 days ago with zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer engagement. The issue references PR #2334 from the 2.x era; the current codebase (snapcraft/models/, snapcraft/commands/, snapcraft/parts/) reflects a completely different architecture, making the specific error message and validation path no longer applicable.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":15.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":25,"confidence":65,"support_request":15},"age_days":2782,"labels":[],"created_at":"2019-01-30T11:49:57.291581+00:00","updated_at":"2019-01-30T11:52:30.261064+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":25,"support_request":15,"confidence":65,"impact":20,"quick_win":15.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29485,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1810915","title":"snapcraft can't tell when multipass is installed but disabled","author":"~popey","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1810915","summary":"Snapcraft fails to detect a disabled multipass snap, prompting to install it and then erroring out. Reported against multipass 2018.12.1 / ~2019 snapcraft; untriaged, 0 comments, no labels, inactive for ~7.6 years.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The report is 2792 days old with 0 comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction, and it targets multipass 2018.12.1 and a ~2019 snapcraft release that are long unsupported. Modern snapcraft (8.x) delegates multipass management to craft-providers, so the detection path described here has been substantially reworked and the original scenario is no longer applicable to current versions.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"confidence":62,"support_request":20},"age_days":2805,"labels":[],"created_at":"2019-01-08T09:33:28.605486+00:00","updated_at":"2019-01-08T09:33:28.605486+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"support_request":20,"confidence":62,"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29511,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1817771","title":"python plugin doesn't properly handle  dependencies from extra-require in \"python-packages\"","author":"~ack","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1817771","summary":"Python plugin ignores extra-require dependencies when multiple extras are specified for the same package (e.g. SQLAlchemy[postgresql] and SQLAlchemy[mysql]); only the first extra's deps install. 7+ years old, no maintainer activity, core18-based, superseded by newer plugin architecture.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 2743 days old with zero comments and no maintainer engagement. It targets a core18-based snap, which is an EOL base. The current codebase has been substantially reworked (python v2 plugin, plugins v2), and the original python plugin code path that mishandled multiple extras for the same package no longer exists in the same form. The workaround (listing dependencies explicitly) is straightforward, and the affected base is no longer supported.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":2755,"labels":[],"created_at":"2019-02-26T18:07:50.111738+00:00","updated_at":"2019-02-26T18:07:50.111738+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29487,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1811362","title":"Cannot package Python3 package - missing binary","author":"~radek-sprta","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1811362","summary":"Snapcraft 2.43.1 build fails with FileNotFoundError for bin/mariner in prime during _wrap_exe; app command points to a binary the Python package does not install. 7.6 years old, no maintainer interaction, snapcraft 2.x EOL and code path removed.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue targets snapcraft 2.43.1 (Ubuntu 18.04 era), and the failing code path snapcraft/internal/meta/_snap_packaging.py no longer exists in the current codebase (repo layout shows snapcraft/meta/ without the internal/ prefix). Related issue #1884683 explicitly notes the 2.x code path is gone. The root cause is a user configuration problem — the app command points to bin/mariner which the poetry-setup build does not install to prime/bin — making this a support question on an EOL version.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":10.5,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"confidence":75,"support_request":70},"age_days":2801,"labels":[],"created_at":"2019-01-11T11:15:42.402422+00:00","updated_at":"2019-01-11T11:15:42.402422+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"support_request":70,"confidence":75,"impact":15,"quick_win":10.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29370,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1779154","title":"BrokenPipeError when `| head`ing output","author":"~saviq","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1779154","summary":"Piping snapcraft revisions output to head triggers a BrokenPipeError traceback. Reported 8+ years ago with zero maintainer interaction; no BrokenPipeError handling found in current codebase.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 2986 days old with zero comments and no labels, showing no maintainer engagement. However, the underlying problem (missing BrokenPipeError handling in the CLI) is a real, reproducible bug that would still affect users piping snapcraft output. The fix is straightforward (catch BrokenPipeError or set SIGPIPE to default), but the extreme age and lack of any triage activity make it unclear whether this is still relevant to the current codebase architecture. A maintainer should confirm whether the issue persists before deciding to fix or close.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":21.25,"staleness":95,"complexity":15,"confidence":60,"support_request":10},"age_days":2998,"labels":[],"created_at":"2018-06-28T14:56:33.009398+00:00","updated_at":"2018-06-28T14:56:33.009398+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":15,"support_request":10,"confidence":60,"impact":25,"quick_win":21.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29482,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1809584","title":"snapcraft register doesn't support non-latin characters","author":"~kornelski","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1809584","summary":"snapcraft register crashes with UnicodeEncodeError on latin-1 terminals due to non-latin chars in click.confirm prompt. Reported against v2.43.1 (2018); code path since rewritten to craft-cli emit/input, no maintainer interaction in 7.7 years.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The traceback points to snapcraft 2.43.1's click.confirm → click.echo path, which has been entirely replaced by craft-cli's emit.progress and confirm_with_user (snapcraft/utils.py:149) using Python's built-in input(). The affected version is no longer supported, the specific bug mechanism no longer exists in the current codebase, and there has been zero maintainer interaction in 7.7 years.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":22.5,"staleness":95,"complexity":25,"confidence":72,"support_request":10},"age_days":2820,"labels":[],"created_at":"2018-12-23T15:20:03.431804+00:00","updated_at":"2018-12-23T15:24:21.752918+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":25,"support_request":10,"confidence":72,"impact":30,"quick_win":22.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29575,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1833220","title":"stage-snaps not usable with a brand store","author":"~anonymouse67","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1833220","summary":"stage-snaps/build-snaps cannot download snaps from a brand store because snapcraft does not propagate UBUNTU_STORE_ID/UBUNTU_STORE_AUTH_DATA_FILENAME to its internal snap download. Unlabeled, 0 comments, no maintainer activity since ~2021; references long-removed Python-2 code.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is a genuine feature gap (brand-store support for stage-snaps/build-snaps), not a support question, so close_not_a_bug doesn't fit. However, it has zero labels, zero comments, and no maintainer interaction in ~4.8 years, and the cited code path (snapcraft/internal/repo/snaps.py) no longer exists in the current craft-parts-based codebase, so it needs a maintainer to re-evaluate whether the problem still reproduces before any close/keep decision.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":15.75,"staleness":95,"complexity":55,"confidence":70,"support_request":15},"age_days":2643,"labels":[],"created_at":"2019-06-18T11:36:00.952343+00:00","updated_at":"2021-10-26T15:31:58.878886+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":55,"support_request":15,"confidence":70,"impact":35,"quick_win":15.75,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29548,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1826741","title":"No OpenHAB-ondra Bluetooth (BlueZ) access","author":"~martin-hagborg","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1826741","summary":"OpenHAB snap on Ubuntu Core 18 fails BlueZ binding init (HANDLER_INITIALIZING_ERROR); reporter asks how to grant the snap Bluetooth access (user in bluetooth group or a bluetooth plug in snapcraft.yaml). No maintainer response; ~7.3 years old.","suggested_action":"close_not_a_bug","suggested_action_reason":"The body is a usage/configuration question ('how does one add the OS user to the bluetooth group on ubuntu snappy core?'), not a reproducible defect in the project's code, and it targets Ubuntu Core 18 which is long past EOL. With 0 comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction in 2682 days, there is no open work to track; the answer (connect the bluetooth plug / group membership) belongs in snapd or OpenHAB documentation, not this repo.","scores":{"impact":5,"quick_win":4.5,"staleness":95,"complexity":10,"confidence":75,"support_request":90},"age_days":2694,"labels":[],"created_at":"2019-04-28T15:12:52.968094+00:00","updated_at":"2019-04-28T15:12:52.968094+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":10,"support_request":90,"confidence":75,"impact":5,"quick_win":4.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":27958,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1684091","title":"snapcraft gives a confusing message when you lack permissions to administer snap","author":"~ev","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1684091","summary":"snapcraft status reports 'Snap X was not found in series 16' when the real cause is that the user lacks collaborator/admin permissions on the snap; reporter suggests a clearer message. No labels, no comments, no maintainer activity in ~9 years.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction in ~3213 days, so it has never been triaged. It is a legitimate (if minor) UX bug report with a concrete expected message, not a support question. I could not verify via tools whether the message was later improved in the store client, so I am not confident enough to close it as stale or fixed.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":17.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":15,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":3433,"labels":[],"created_at":"2017-04-19T11:06:08.125664+00:00","updated_at":"2017-11-14T00:21:06.010218+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":15,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":20,"quick_win":17.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29471,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1808043","title":"FileNotFoundError: [Errno 2] No such file or directory: ","author":"~ildella","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1808043","summary":"snapcraft 2.43.1 nodejs plugin build fails with FileNotFoundError for app command in prime dir during npm install; no maintainer response, 0 comments, 2820 days old, nodejs plugin removed from modern snapcraft","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 2820 days old (~7.7 years) with zero comments and no maintainer interaction. It references snapcraft 2.43.1 on Ubuntu 18.10, both long since EOL. The nodejs plugin has been removed from modern snapcraft (the current repo layout shows no nodejs_plugin.py under snapcraft/parts/plugins/). The original problem is no longer reproducible in current versions and the affected version is no longer supported.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":12.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"confidence":70,"support_request":30},"age_days":2832,"labels":[],"created_at":"2018-12-11T21:04:20.535262+00:00","updated_at":"2018-12-11T21:05:36.628210+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"support_request":30,"confidence":70,"impact":20,"quick_win":12.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29526,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1822727","title":"Snapcraft complains the missing `source` property when the source URL is determined in override-pull scriptlet","author":"~brlin","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1822727","summary":"Snapcraft rejects snapcraft.yaml when a part omits `source` because the URL is resolved at runtime in an override-pull scriptlet; reporter suggests deferring the check or adding snapcraftctl set-source. No labels, no comments, no maintainer activity for ~7.4 years.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"Zero comments, no labels, no assignee, and no maintainer interaction for ~2709 days — the issue has never been assessed. It is a real validation/UX bug (schema requires `source` even when override-pull fully determines the source), not a support question, so it should be triaged rather than auto-closed; however, its age and the project's major refactor to craft-parts/craft-application since 2017 mean the original code paths likely no longer exist, so a maintainer needs to verify whether it still reproduces before any fix or close.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":55,"confidence":55,"support_request":15},"age_days":2721,"labels":[],"created_at":"2019-04-02T07:08:26.456430+00:00","updated_at":"2019-04-02T07:08:26.456430+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":55,"support_request":15,"confidence":55,"impact":40,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29509,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1816524","title":"snapcraft register-key fails ","author":"~muthiahn","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1816524","summary":"snapcraft 2.43.1 register-key fails with GPG 'Operation cancelled' during snap export-key; 7.5 years old, no labels, zero comments, no maintainer activity; affected 2.x version is long deprecated.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 2751 days old with zero comments and no maintainer interaction, and it is no longer applicable: the traceback references snapcraft/_store.py and cli/assertions.py from the 2.43.1+18.4 (Python 3.6) era, code paths that no longer exist in the current snapcraft/store and snapcraft/commands layout, and the GPG 'Operation cancelled' error is an environmental pinentry/agent problem that cannot be reproduced without the reporter's setup.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":12.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"confidence":70,"support_request":45},"age_days":2763,"labels":[],"created_at":"2019-02-19T07:50:10.131760+00:00","updated_at":"2019-04-22T06:08:48.535746+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"support_request":45,"confidence":70,"impact":20,"quick_win":12.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29376,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1782636","title":"Snapcraft request user to login even if the user is logged in","author":"~nataliabidart","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1782636","summary":"2017 report that snapcraft register-key re-prompts for Ubuntu One login right after a successful snapcraft login; reporter suggests a clearer message. No labels, 0 comments, no maintainer activity for ~8 years; codebase since fully rewritten.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 2965 days old with 0 comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction, and it describes the legacy Ubuntu One SSO flow from the snapcraft 2.x era. The current repo has a completely rewritten store client (snapcraft/store/), so the original re-prompt behavior no longer applies; a near-identical Launchpad bug (#1634803) is equally dormant. Confidence is moderate because repo tools could not pin a SHA to verify the current register-key code path.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":14.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"confidence":60,"support_request":10},"age_days":2977,"labels":[],"created_at":"2018-07-19T19:12:58.636928+00:00","updated_at":"2018-07-19T19:12:58.636928+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"support_request":10,"confidence":60,"impact":20,"quick_win":14.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29366,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1778530","title":"rust plugin. failed build with RUST ver. 1.27","author":"~general-beck","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1778530","summary":"Snapcraft rust plugin fails with Rust 1.27: 'could not execute process rustc -vV (never executed)'; 1.26.2 works. 8 years old, zero comments, no maintainer response. The plugin has since been substantially rewritten.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 2989 days old with zero comments and no maintainer interaction, and the failure is specific to Rust 1.27 (Nov 2018) on the retired build.snapcraft.io CI. The current snapcraft repo shows a modern rustup-based rust plugin, so the original version-specific problem is no longer reproducible or applicable to supported versions.","scores":{"impact":5,"quick_win":3.75,"staleness":95,"complexity":25,"confidence":65,"support_request":10},"age_days":3001,"labels":["plugin","rust"],"created_at":"2018-06-25T14:14:26.941218+00:00","updated_at":"2018-09-17T03:28:19.675860+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":25,"support_request":10,"confidence":65,"impact":5,"quick_win":3.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29423,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1797795","title":"An error occurred building hello world Snapcraft","author":"~pop-alx","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1797795","summary":"Snapcraft 2.43.1 prime crashes with FileNotFoundError when app command points to bin/hello, but only gnu-bash part is built so the binary doesn't exist. User configuration error, 7.9 years old, 0 comments, no labels.","suggested_action":"close_not_a_bug","suggested_action_reason":"The user's snapcraft.yaml defines an app with 'command: bin/hello' but the only part built is gnu-bash (which produces bin/bash, not bin/hello). No part builds the hello binary, so prime/bin/hello correctly does not exist. This is a user configuration error, not a snapcraft bug. The issue is 2878 days old with 0 comments and no maintainer engagement.","scores":{"impact":10,"quick_win":9.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":10,"confidence":75,"support_request":85},"age_days":2890,"labels":[],"created_at":"2018-10-14T18:31:19.012493+00:00","updated_at":"2018-10-20T13:38:02.972053+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":10,"support_request":85,"confidence":75,"impact":10,"quick_win":9.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29417,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1795827","title":"Snapcraft doesn't install snapcraft inside the lxd container","author":"~saviq","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1795827","summary":"Snapcraft's LXD build provider failed to install the snapcraft snap inside the container, leaving 'snapcraft: not found'. Reported ~8 years ago with no maintainer interaction; the provider code has since been heavily refactored (craft-providers integration).","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 2889 days old with zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction. The build-provider code path it touches has since been substantially rewritten — commit 8a06cdbbd 'providers: integrate craft-providers support' and 841b41fa3 'build providers: improve handling in snap logic (#2507)' replaced the old in-container snap installation logic, and the SNAPCRAFT_BUILD_ENVIRONMENT_CHANNEL_SNAPCRAFT env var referenced in the report no longer appears anywhere in the current codebase. The original problem is no longer reproducible against the current architecture.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":22.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":45,"confidence":55,"support_request":15},"age_days":2902,"labels":[],"created_at":"2018-10-03T08:50:39.328028+00:00","updated_at":"2018-10-03T08:51:13.892323+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":45,"support_request":15,"confidence":55,"impact":40,"quick_win":22.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29375,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1782246","title":"Unable to use snaps in an IPV6 only setup","author":"~geoffmcc","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1782246","summary":"Request for IPv6 support so snaps work in IPv6-only environments; snap login fails dialing an IPv4 store endpoint (91.189.92.17). 8 years old, no labels, zero comments, no maintainer interaction.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The report is 2967 days old with 0 comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction, and it is fundamentally a request for IPv6 on the snap store (dashboard.snapcraft.io) — server-side infrastructure outside this client repo's scope, with the error coming from snapd's `snap login` rather than snapcraft code. The specific IPv4 endpoint in the error is long outdated, so the original report is no longer actionable as written. Confidence is moderate because I could not verify current store IPv6 status (tool lookups failed).","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"confidence":45,"support_request":55},"age_days":2979,"labels":[],"created_at":"2018-07-17T22:01:28.082288+00:00","updated_at":"2018-07-17T22:01:28.082288+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"support_request":55,"confidence":45,"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":28479,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1586400","title":"Snap type: change from \"os\" to \"core\"","author":"~kyrofa","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1586400","summary":"Request to rename snapd's 'os' snap type to 'core' to avoid ambiguity on classic systems. 10+ years old with zero comments; the rename has since been implemented in snapd (core snap is now type 'core'), so the issue is moot.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 3748 days old with 0 comments and no maintainer engagement, and the requested rename has already been implemented: current snapd uses 'core' as the snap type for the core snap, so the 'os' type and its ambiguity no longer exist. Closing as stale/moot is appropriate since the original problem is no longer reproducible.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":14.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"confidence":70,"support_request":0},"age_days":3760,"labels":[],"created_at":"2016-05-27T13:46:20.254680+00:00","updated_at":"2017-09-11T17:51:43.964109+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"support_request":0,"confidence":70,"impact":20,"quick_win":14.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29067,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1654304","title":"Allow pinning a source archive","author":"~mterry","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1654304","summary":"Feature request (2017) to let snapcraft pin apt source archives (e.g., the Touch overlay PPA above xenial-updates) via preferences.d, to avoid version drift in LP-built Touch snaps. No maintainer response; the xenial/Touch-overlay context is obsolete.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"Zero comments and no maintainer engagement in ~9.4 years (last activity 3419 days ago), and the concrete use case is obsolete: it targets xenial (EOL) with the Touch overlay PPA and LP-built unity8 snaps, a workflow that no longer exists in the core22/core24-era snapcraft. If apt pinning is still wanted, it should be re-filed against the current snapcraft with a fresh reproducer.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":15.75,"staleness":95,"complexity":55,"confidence":68,"support_request":25},"age_days":3537,"labels":["personal"],"created_at":"2017-01-05T15:19:59.503544+00:00","updated_at":"2017-04-21T13:59:52.271059+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":55,"support_request":25,"confidence":68,"impact":35,"quick_win":15.75,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29184,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1697468","title":"snapcraft doesn't validate plugs: values","author":"~msweet","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1697468","summary":"Request to add whitespace validation for plugs values in snapcraft.yaml (e.g. 'home x11' instead of 'home, x11'). Filed ~2015 during the build.snapcraft.io era, zero comments, no labels, no maintainer interaction in 9+ years.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 3367 days old with zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction. It references build.snapcraft.io, which no longer exists, and the snapcraft codebase has been completely rewritten multiple times since then (now using craft-cli and pydantic-based models in snapcraft/models/). The original problem context is no longer applicable, though the underlying validation concern could theoretically still be relevant to the current validation framework.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":16.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":20,"confidence":40,"support_request":10},"age_days":3379,"labels":[],"created_at":"2017-06-12T14:41:41.125786+00:00","updated_at":"2017-06-13T01:59:15.192081+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":20,"support_request":10,"confidence":40,"impact":20,"quick_win":16.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29288,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1744822","title":"poor naming conventions for scripts prepare and install","author":"~bsutton","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1744822","summary":"Suggestion to rename snapcraft plugin scripts 'prepare' and 'install' to 'pre-build' and 'post-build' for clarity. Unlabeled, zero comments, inactive ~8.6 years; the plugin scriptlets were later removed in favor of the override-<step> model.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is inactive for ~8.6 years (3143 days, 0 comments, no labels) and the specific plugin scriptlets it targets — 'prepare' and 'install' — were removed in commit c6542b5f7 (#2327), replaced by the override-<step> lifecycle model now documented in docs/explanation/parts-lifecycle.rst. The naming complaint no longer applies to the current architecture.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":8.25,"staleness":95,"complexity":45,"confidence":85,"support_request":20},"age_days":3155,"labels":[],"created_at":"2018-01-22T23:16:05.554342+00:00","updated_at":"2018-01-22T23:16:05.554342+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":45,"support_request":20,"confidence":85,"impact":15,"quick_win":8.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29207,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1717921","title":"CI: BlockingIOError about 50% of the time","author":"~kalikiana","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1717921","summary":"Flaky CI failure on Travis: BlockingIOError (Errno 11) raised in the unittest runner while downloading Python modules. Reported ~9 years ago with no maintainer interaction; Travis and Python 3.5 are obsolete and the project now uses GitHub Actions.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 3269 days old with 0 comments, 0 labels, and no maintainer response, and it is no longer applicable: the traceback is from /usr/lib/python3.5/ on Travis, while the current repo ships 11 .github/workflows/ files and no .travis.yml, so the exact CI environment and Python version that produced the flake no longer exist. It is a CI-environment flake (error in unittest/runner.py writeln), not a reproducible product bug.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":10.5,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"confidence":72,"support_request":20},"age_days":3281,"labels":[],"created_at":"2017-09-18T12:46:41.978577+00:00","updated_at":"2017-10-20T18:32:08.177043+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"support_request":20,"confidence":72,"impact":15,"quick_win":10.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29162,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1683827","title":"snapcraft list-revisions strip trailing 0's from versions","author":"~matiasb","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1683827","summary":"snapcraft list-revisions displayed version 0.10 as 0.1, stripping trailing zeros. Reported in 2017 with no maintainer response. Project has since been fully rearchitected; original code path no longer exists.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is from April 2017 (3422 days old) with zero comments and no maintainer interaction. The snapcraft project has undergone a complete rearchitecture since then — the current codebase uses a models/services/store architecture that did not exist in 2017, making the original list-revisions display code path obsolete. A related Launchpad bug (#1586162) was also closed. The specific formatting bug in the old code is no longer applicable to the current codebase.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":13.5,"staleness":95,"complexity":10,"confidence":55,"support_request":5},"age_days":3434,"labels":["apw-snappy"],"created_at":"2017-04-18T14:35:12.256477+00:00","updated_at":"2017-09-18T06:09:33.377107+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":10,"support_request":5,"confidence":55,"impact":15,"quick_win":13.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29137,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1672578","title":"Adding one more parameter project name to the snapcraft init command","author":"~liu-xiao-guo","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1672578","summary":"Feature request to add a project name argument to 'snapcraft init' so the generated snapcraft.yaml template is pre-filled with the name. No maintainer response, no labels, no activity in ~9.5 years.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is a well-formed feature request (add a positional project-name argument to the init command so the template's name/summary/description fields are pre-populated) but shows zero maintainer engagement: no labels, no comments, no assignee, and last activity 3458 days ago. It has never been triaged, so needs_triage is the correct default. The request is small in scope (a CLI argument plus template substitution in the init command) and low impact — a convenience improvement, not a bug — so impact is low. Staleness is high given the ~9.5-year inactivity, but the underlying convenience need is still plausible in modern snapcraft, so it is not clearly obsolete enough to close as stale without first checking whether the init command already accepts a name argument.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":15.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":25,"confidence":70,"support_request":30},"age_days":3470,"labels":[],"created_at":"2017-03-14T00:56:26.683595+00:00","updated_at":"2017-03-14T00:56:26.683595+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":25,"support_request":30,"confidence":70,"impact":20,"quick_win":15.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29133,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1670749","title":"classic confinement requires manually setting PATH and PYTHONPATH","author":"~corey.bryant","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1670749","summary":"Classic-confinement snaps built with the python plugin require manually setting PATH and PYTHONPATH via environment: to include $SNAP/bin and $SNAP/lib/python2.7/site-packages; reporter argues snapcraft should do this automatically. No maintainer response or labels; issue is ~9 years old.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 3464 days old with zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction. It references the python plugin and python2.7 site-packages, both of which are long since removed from snapcraft (the python plugin was deprecated/removed in favor of python-common and the project has moved to Python 3), so the specific problem described is no longer reproducible in current versions. The workaround via environment: remains valid, and the underlying concern (automatic PATH/PYTHONPATH injection) is a design decision that would need fresh triage if still relevant.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":21.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"confidence":55,"support_request":30},"age_days":3476,"labels":["openstack"],"created_at":"2017-03-07T16:25:06.891790+00:00","updated_at":"2019-07-31T16:01:12.328797+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"support_request":30,"confidence":55,"impact":35,"quick_win":21.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29166,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1686153","title":"Test is broken: snapcraft.tests.sources.test_subversion.SubversionDetailsTestCase.test_svn_details_commit","author":"~facundo","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1686153","summary":"Failing subversion source unit test (test_svn_details_commit) reported in old snapcraft. The referenced snapcraft.sources module and test file no longer exist in the current codebase; 9+ years inactive with no maintainer response.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 3415 days old with zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction, and the code it references is gone: the current repo layout has no snapcraft/sources/ module and no snapcraft/tests/ directory (tests now live under tests/unit/ with the craft-parts-based snapcraft/parts/ architecture), so the reported test failure is no longer reproducible or applicable.","scores":{"impact":5,"quick_win":4.5,"staleness":95,"complexity":10,"confidence":80,"support_request":0},"age_days":3427,"labels":[],"created_at":"2017-04-25T16:58:04.115895+00:00","updated_at":"2017-04-25T16:58:04.115895+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":10,"support_request":0,"confidence":80,"impact":5,"quick_win":4.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29091,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1661787","title":"Rewriting .pc file paths breaks using at runtime","author":"~mrjogo","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1661787","summary":"Snapcraft's staging step rewrites .pc pkg-config files to prepend the stage directory to the prefix variable, but this rewrite is not reverted before snapping, breaking .pc files at runtime (e.g. gazebo_ros gzserver). No maintainer has responded; the issue is 9.5 years old.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 3496 days old with zero comments and no maintainer interaction. The referenced code path (PluginHandler.stage in snapcraft/internal/pluginhandler/__init__.py) no longer exists in the current codebase — the staging logic has been moved to craft-parts, where fix_pkg_config is called during the stage step (step_handler.py) and there is also a normalize step that strips prepended prefixes from staged snaps' .pc files (craft-parts#251, snapcraft#3848). The original problem described in this issue has been substantially addressed by subsequent refactoring and fixes in the craft-parts ecosystem, making this issue no longer applicable to the current architecture.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":20.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":60,"confidence":75,"support_request":10},"age_days":3508,"labels":["robotics"],"created_at":"2017-02-04T01:42:38.723889+00:00","updated_at":"2017-03-21T19:21:20.331391+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":60,"support_request":10,"confidence":75,"impact":50,"quick_win":20.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29056,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1648039","title":"Swig isn't executed with snapcraft python plugin","author":"~didrocks","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1648039","summary":"Snapcraft python plugin (2016) fails to run swig during pip install, so generated .py bindings are missing from the built snap. No maintainer response in ~10 years; references python2 and swig3.0, both EOL.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 3554 days old with zero comments or labels, references python2 and swig3.0 (both long EOL), and targets the legacy snapcraft 1.x python plugin whose pip_install() code path no longer exists in the current craft-parts-based architecture. The original problem is no longer reproducible in any supported snapcraft version.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":10.5,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"confidence":82,"support_request":15},"age_days":3566,"labels":[],"created_at":"2016-12-07T10:33:05.602872+00:00","updated_at":"2016-12-07T11:42:31.260948+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"support_request":15,"confidence":82,"impact":15,"quick_win":10.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29250,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1735410","title":"Localization support","author":"~mkljczk","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1735410","summary":"Request to implement localization (l10n) support in Snapcraft, filed by an external contributor who offered to take it on. Open ~8.7 years with zero comments, no maintainer response, and no evidence of any l10n work in the codebase.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 3196 days old with 0 comments and no maintainer engagement, and the only related item found is the same request on Launchpad (bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1735410), also open with no activity. The reporter's offer to self-assign has long since lapsed, and the modern snapcraft codebase (rewritten in Python with a parts-based architecture) shows no l10n infrastructure, so the original request is no longer actionable as filed. If localization is still desired, it should be re-filed with a concrete scope.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":7.5,"staleness":95,"complexity":70,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":3208,"labels":["bitesize","l10n"],"created_at":"2017-11-30T12:29:52.869153+00:00","updated_at":"2017-12-19T16:45:31.918069+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":70,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":25,"quick_win":7.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":39840,"project_name":"craft-providers","source":"github","external_id":"881","title":"ci: add Linux multipass weekly tests","author":"lengau","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-providers/pull/881","summary":"PR to add Linux multipass weekly CI tests. Inactive for 263 days with failing CI checks. Feature already merged in commit bc946f0.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The feature this PR implements was already merged in commit bc946f0 ('ci(github): add weekly multipass integration tests (#460)'). The PR has been inactive for 263 days with 0 reviewer engagement and multiple failing CI checks, making it irrelevant.","scores":{"impact":10,"quick_win":8.5,"staleness":95,"complexity":15,"confidence":90},"age_days":271,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-12-16T01:01:09+00:00","updated_at":"2025-12-16T01:12:28+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":15,"support_request":null,"confidence":90,"impact":10,"quick_win":8.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29905,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"2000890","title":"Changed base from 20->22, crash report","author":"~williamcharltonengineering","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2000890","summary":"User reported crash when changing base from core20 to core22 in snapcraft 7.2.10. KeyError: 'core22' in legacy build provider code. Issue is 1339 days old with no activity.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 1339 days old and reports a KeyError for 'core22' in legacy snapcraft code that only recognized 'core18' and 'core20'. Core22 support was added to snapcraft years ago, so this bug has been fixed. The issue is no longer relevant to current versions.","scores":{"impact":10,"quick_win":8.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":20,"confidence":85,"support_request":0},"age_days":1349,"labels":[],"created_at":"2023-01-03T05:10:53.069679+00:00","updated_at":"2023-01-03T05:34:40.303200+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":20,"support_request":0,"confidence":85,"impact":10,"quick_win":8.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29928,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"2011634","title":"New App Icon Not Shown in Ubuntu Software","author":"~arian73","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2011634","summary":"Report that a changed app icon is not displaying in Ubuntu Software. Issue is 1269 days old with no maintainer engagement, labels, or comments, and lacks reproduction details.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 1269 days old with zero maintainer engagement, no labels, and no comments. The description ('Changed the icon. Ubuntu Software is not showing the new icon.') provides no reproduction steps, no context about what icon was changed or how, making it impossible to reproduce or triage. The extreme age suggests the affected version may no longer be supported or the problem is no longer reproducible.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":14.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"confidence":45,"support_request":75},"age_days":1278,"labels":[],"created_at":"2023-03-14T21:34:08.877389+00:00","updated_at":"2023-03-14T21:34:08.877389+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"support_request":75,"confidence":45,"impact":20,"quick_win":14.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":39820,"project_name":"craft-providers","source":"github","external_id":"271","title":"LXD integration tests incompatible with canonical/setup-lxd","author":"mr-cal","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-providers/issues/271","summary":"LXD integration tests fail with canonical/setup-lxd due to user/group permissions. The legacy CI workflow causing this was removed and replaced with starflow workflows, making this issue obsolete.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue targets the legacy CI workflow which has been removed and replaced with canonical/starflow workflows. The specific canonical/setup-lxd incompatibility is no longer relevant to the current CI setup.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":14.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"confidence":85,"support_request":10},"age_days":1214,"labels":["Type: Bug"],"created_at":"2023-05-17T17:44:44+00:00","updated_at":"2026-04-22T02:48:01+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"support_request":10,"confidence":85,"impact":20,"quick_win":14.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29300,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1747778","title":"Snapcraft.yml in 'snap' directory.  prime/parts/stage in '.'","author":"~8-launchpad-michaelcole-com","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1747778","summary":"2017 request to place snapcraft build dirs (parts, prime, stage) next to snapcraft.yml in ./snap/ instead of the project root. No response for 8.5 years; dirs remain in project root by design, CRAFT_PARTS_DIR partially addresses configurability.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"Filed 3128 days ago against the snapcraft 2.x codebase with zero comments, labels, or maintainer interaction, and the project has since been fully rewritten on the craft-parts architecture, which standardizes parts/stage/prime in the project root across all craft tools. The configurability concern is partially addressed by the CRAFT_PARTS_DIR env var (per related request #1594374), and the specific ask to relocate dirs next to snapcraft.yml contradicts the current architecture, so the issue is no longer actionable in its original form.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":6.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":60,"confidence":70,"support_request":40},"age_days":3140,"labels":[],"created_at":"2018-02-06T22:47:12.992267+00:00","updated_at":"2018-02-06T23:39:56.697508+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":60,"support_request":40,"confidence":70,"impact":15,"quick_win":6.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29933,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"2012074","title":"snapcraft cannot build snap by default on aarch64","author":"~gbeuzeboc","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2012074","summary":"snapcraft init defaults to core20 base which lacks arm64 Multipass images, causing build failures on aarch64. Fixed by PR #4118 which changed the default init base to core22.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 3.5 years old with no activity for over 3 years. PR #4118 was merged to change `snapcraft init` default base from core20 to core22, which has proper arm64/aarch64 Multipass image support. New projects created with updated snapcraft will not encounter this problem.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":36.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":10,"confidence":85,"support_request":20},"age_days":1275,"labels":[],"created_at":"2023-03-17T14:35:58.391984+00:00","updated_at":"2023-03-21T20:21:00.968163+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":10,"support_request":20,"confidence":85,"impact":40,"quick_win":36.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":27833,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1606819","title":"snapcraft doesn't tell me where to put the .py file for my custom plugin","author":"~zyga","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1606819","summary":"Request for a clearer error when a custom plugin's .py file is in the wrong location; author self-resolved in an edit (file goes in parts/plugins/x_foo.py, 'plugin: x-foo'). No maintainer activity for ~8.6 years.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The reporter self-resolved the underlying question in an EDIT ('the plugin has to be in parts/plugins/x_foo.py and the syntax in snapcraft yams has to be plugin: x-foo'), there are 0 comments and no maintainer interaction, and last activity was ~8.6 years ago. The snapcraft 1.x-era plugin loader that produced 'unknown plugin: custom' has since been rewritten (current codebase is craft-parts based), so the specific error message and code path are no longer applicable.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":12.75,"staleness":95,"complexity":15,"confidence":65,"support_request":45},"age_days":3700,"labels":["bitesize","custom-plugin","ui"],"created_at":"2016-07-27T08:44:12.470425+00:00","updated_at":"2018-01-09T16:18:12.133647+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":15,"support_request":45,"confidence":65,"impact":15,"quick_win":12.75,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29910,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"2002980","title":"Unpredictable \"passthrough\" behaviour","author":"~ondrak","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2002980","summary":"Inconsistent passthrough behavior between snapcraft.yaml and gadget.yaml; untriaged, no activity for 1326 days","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 1326 days old with zero maintainer engagement, no labels, and no comments. The project has likely evolved significantly since then, and the reported behavior may no longer be reproducible or relevant to current versions. No evidence suggests this is still an active concern.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":28.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"confidence":65,"support_request":20},"age_days":1335,"labels":[],"created_at":"2023-01-16T13:05:37.235482+00:00","updated_at":"2023-01-16T13:05:37.235482+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"support_request":20,"confidence":65,"impact":40,"quick_win":28.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29909,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"2002538","title":"override-prime ignore failure on rebuild","author":"~gbeuzeboc","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2002538","summary":"Bug: override-prime step skipped after failure on rebuild, causing silent incorrect snap creation. Issue is 1331 days old with no maintainer engagement.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 1331 days old with zero maintainer engagement, no labels, and no comments. The reported versions (snapcraft 7.2.9, snapd 2.58) are significantly outdated and no longer supported. After over 3 years without follow-up from the reporter or acknowledgment from maintainers, and given that the build system architecture may have changed since then, this issue is considered stale and no longer applicable to current versions.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"confidence":60,"support_request":10},"age_days":1340,"labels":[],"created_at":"2023-01-11T13:46:59.275948+00:00","updated_at":"2023-01-11T13:50:30.313362+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":60,"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29897,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1998269","title":"Gnome extension breaks fontconfig for some applications","author":"~zoopgoop","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1998269","summary":"GNOME extension causes fontconfig failures in snap applications like Wine and Steam; issue is 1373 days old with no maintainer response or labels.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has been inactive for 1373 days (~3.75 years) with zero maintainer comments, no labels, and no assignee. The reporter has not provided follow-up information, and the problem may have been addressed in newer versions of snapcraft or the GNOME extension, or may no longer be reproducible with current fontconfig behavior.","scores":{"impact":70,"quick_win":28.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":60,"confidence":70,"support_request":20},"age_days":1383,"labels":[],"created_at":"2022-11-30T01:36:03.927454+00:00","updated_at":"2022-11-30T02:12:52.266460+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":60,"support_request":20,"confidence":70,"impact":70,"quick_win":28.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":28025,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1758859","title":"'snapcraft push' dies with traceback if credentials are invalid","author":"~romain-janvier","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1758859","summary":"snapcraft push crashes with UnicodeDecodeError traceback on invalid credentials, reported in 2018 via Travis CI for CloudCompare; no labels, no comments, no maintainer interaction in 8+ years.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 3080 days old (~8.4 years), from the snapcraft 2.x era, with zero labels, zero comments, and no maintainer engagement. The modern codebase has been completely restructured (extensions, linters, models, parts, services, store directories), making the specific UnicodeDecodeError in the old push/credentials code path no longer applicable to current versions.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":14.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"confidence":72,"support_request":15},"age_days":3093,"labels":[],"created_at":"2018-03-26T09:26:50.654088+00:00","updated_at":"2018-03-26T21:30:42.122101+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"support_request":15,"confidence":72,"impact":20,"quick_win":14.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":28026,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1758895","title":"virtual (build) packages are resolved by first match","author":"~minagalic","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1758895","summary":"Bug report that virtual build packages (e.g. tclsh) are resolved by first apt match, possibly picking the wrong architecture. Filed 8+ years ago against snapcraft/internal/repo/_deb.py, which no longer exists in the current codebase; no maintainer interaction.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 3080 days old with 0 comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction, and it references snapcraft/internal/repo/_deb.py — a path that no longer appears in the current repo layout (which shows snapcraft/parts/, snapcraft/elf/, etc.), indicating the code was substantially restructured and the affected version is no longer supported. If the same first-match behavior persists in the new code, it should be re-filed against the current path rather than this 8-year-old report.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":22.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":45,"confidence":60,"support_request":10},"age_days":3092,"labels":[],"created_at":"2018-03-26T12:20:32.120273+00:00","updated_at":"2018-04-24T09:58:04.719237+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":45,"support_request":10,"confidence":60,"impact":40,"quick_win":22.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29864,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1990126","title":"\"snapcraft help <plugin>\" fails with SC7 and core22 in project directory","author":"~rpjday","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1990126","summary":"snapcraft help <plugin> validates snapcraft.yaml unnecessarily, failing when core22 extensions are used. Untriaged, 1445 days old, no maintainer engagement.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no maintainer comments, and no assignee after 1445 days. While the reported bug (help command validating snapcraft.yaml when it shouldn't need to) appears legitimate and the fix likely involves skipping validation for help-only commands, no maintainer has assessed it yet. The issue remains potentially relevant as core22 extensions may still be in use.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":35.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"confidence":65,"support_request":10},"age_days":1455,"labels":[],"created_at":"2022-09-19T09:01:29.569608+00:00","updated_at":"2022-12-29T14:24:48.097008+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"support_request":10,"confidence":65,"impact":50,"quick_win":35.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29862,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1989499","title":"[core22] gnome ext prevents use of configure hook","author":"~awe","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1989499","summary":"Gnome extension's command-chain prevents configure hooks from running in snapcraft 7.1.3 with core22. Untriaged, no maintainer engagement.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no maintainer comments, and no assignee, indicating it hasn't been assessed. While it's 4 years old with no activity, there's no evidence it was fixed or is no longer relevant, so it needs triage to determine current applicability.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"confidence":55,"support_request":20},"age_days":1460,"labels":[],"created_at":"2022-09-13T19:04:33.528600+00:00","updated_at":"2022-10-06T15:45:28.124752+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"support_request":20,"confidence":55,"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29876,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1992213","title":"Snapcraft crashes when the APT unprivileged user owns the host's source list file instead of root","author":"~brlin","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1992213","summary":"Snapcraft crashes when APT source list files have restrictive permissions (owned by _apt user with 0600). Issue is 4 years old with no maintainer response.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"Issue is 1426 days old with zero maintainer engagement, no labels, and no comments. The traceback references snapcraft_legacy code paths which have likely been refactored or removed in modern snapcraft. The underlying issue involves APT's unprivileged user sandbox permissions, which is a system-level behavior rather than a snapcraft bug.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":16.25,"staleness":95,"complexity":35,"confidence":65,"support_request":45},"age_days":1436,"labels":[],"created_at":"2022-10-08T02:26:38.598990+00:00","updated_at":"2022-10-08T02:26:39.301338+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":35,"support_request":45,"confidence":65,"impact":25,"quick_win":16.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29855,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1988787","title":"`snapcraft metrics` fails for `lotus`","author":"~ianconsolata","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1988787","summary":"Report of a Snap Store 500 error when running `snapcraft metrics` for the `lotus` snap. Unaddressed for 4 years with zero comments.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 1458 days old with zero maintainer engagement or comments. It reports a Snap Store 500 error from an outdated snapcraft version (5.0), and server-side API errors of this nature are typically transient or resolved in current versions, making the issue no longer applicable.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":24.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":20,"confidence":80,"support_request":10},"age_days":1468,"labels":[],"created_at":"2022-09-05T23:33:35.524876+00:00","updated_at":"2022-09-05T23:33:35.524876+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":20,"support_request":10,"confidence":80,"impact":30,"quick_win":24.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29837,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1984223","title":"Snapcraft on riscv64 tries to install non-existent multipass snap","author":"~xypron","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1984223","summary":"Snapcraft on riscv64 prompts for multipass setup instead of using lxd as default provider. Issue is 4+ years old with no maintainer interaction.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 1485 days old with zero comments and no maintainer interaction. The default provider behavior has likely changed significantly in newer snapcraft versions (the issue references snapcraft 7.1.1 from 2022), and there is no evidence this remains reproducible or relevant in current releases.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":28.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"confidence":40,"support_request":20},"age_days":1494,"labels":["riscv64"],"created_at":"2022-08-10T15:08:33.476713+00:00","updated_at":"2022-08-25T07:00:04.051423+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"support_request":20,"confidence":40,"impact":40,"quick_win":28.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29521,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1822197","title":" File \"/snap/snapcraft/2650/legacy_snapcraft/bin/snapcraft\", line 11, in <module>     load_entry_point('snapcraft==2.43.1', 'console_scripts', 'snapcraft')()   File \"/snap/snapcraft/2650/legacy_snapcraft/lib/python3.5/site-packages/click/core.py\", line 722, in __call__     return self.main(*args, **kwargs)   File \"/snap/snapcraft/2650/legacy_snapcraft/lib/python3.5/site-packages/click/core.py\", line 697, in main     rv = self.invoke(ctx)   File \"/snap/snapcraft/2650/legacy_snapcraft/lib/python3.5/site-packages/click/core.py\", line 1066, in invoke     return _process_result(sub_ctx.command.invoke(sub_ctx))   File \"/snap/snapcraft/2650/legacy_snapcraft/lib/python3.5/site-packages/click/core.py\", line 895, in invoke     return ctx.invoke(self.callback, **ctx.params)   File \"/snap/snapcraft/2650/legacy_snapcraft/lib/python3.5/site-packages/click/core.py\", line 535, in invoke     return callback(*args, **kwargs)   File \"/snap/snapcraft/2650/legacy_snapcraft/lib/python3.5/site-packages/snapcraft/cli/lifecycle.py\", line 187, in prime     _execute(steps.PRIME, parts, **kwargs)   File \"/snap/snapcraft/2650/legacy_snapcraft/lib/python3.5/site-packages/snapcraft/cli/lifecycle.py\", line 98, in _execute     lifecycle.execute(step, project_config, parts)   File \"/snap/snapcraft/2650/legacy_snapcraft/lib/python3.5/site-packages/snapcraft/internal/lifecycle/_runner.py\", line 90, in execute     executor.run(step, part_names)   File \"/snap/snapcraft/2650/legacy_snapcraft/lib/python3.5/site-packages/snapcraft/internal/lifecycle/_runner.py\", line 194, in run     self._handle_step(part_names, part, step, current_step, cli_config)   File \"/snap/snapcraft/2650/legacy_snapcraft/lib/python3.5/site-packages/snapcraft/internal/lifecycle/_runner.py\", line 208, in _handle_step     getattr(self, \"_run_{}\".format(current_step.name))(part)   File \"/snap/snapcraft/2650/legacy_snapcraft/lib/python3.5/site-packages/snapcraft/internal/lifecycle/_runner.py\", line 250, in _run_pull     self._run_step(step=steps.PULL, part=part, progress=\"Pulling\")   File \"/snap/snapcraft/2650/legacy_snapcraft/lib/python3.5/site-packages/snapcraft/internal/lifecycle/_runner.py\", line 327, in _run_step     getattr(part, step.name)()   File \"/snap/snapcraft/2650/legacy_snapcraft/lib/python3.5/site-packages/snapcraft/internal/pluginhandler/__init__.py\", line 413, in pull     self._runner.pull()   File \"/snap/snapcraft/2650/legacy_snapcraft/lib/python3.5/site-packages/snapcraft/internal/pluginhandler/_runner.py\", line 83, in pull     \"override-pull\", self._override_pull_scriptlet, self._sourcedir   File \"/snap/snapcraft/2650/legacy_snapcraft/lib/python3.5/site-packages/snapcraft/internal/pluginhandler/_runner.py\", line 162, in _run_scriptlet     scriptlet_name, function_call.strip()   File \"/snap/snapcraft/2650/legacy_snapcraft/lib/python3.5/site-packages/snapcraft/internal/pluginhandler/_runner.py\", line 218, in _handle_builtin_function     function(**function_args)   File \"/snap/snapcraft/2650/legacy_snapcraft/lib/python3.5/site-packages/snapcraft/internal/pluginhandler/__init__.py\", line 432, in _do_pull     self.source_handler.pull()   File \"/snap/snapcraft/2650/legacy_snapcraft/lib/python3.5/site-packages/snapcraft/internal/sources/_base.py\", line 106, in pull     self.provision(self.source_dir, src=source_file, clean_target=False)   File \"/snap/snapcraft/2650/legacy_snapcraft/lib/python3.5/site-packages/snapcraft/internal/sources/_zip.py\", line 66, in provision     with zipfile.ZipFile(zip, \"r\") as f:   File \"/snap/snapcraft/2650/legacy_snapcraft/usr/lib/python3.5/zipfile.py\", line 1026, in __init__     self._RealGetContents()   File \"/snap/snapcraft/2650/legacy_snapcraft/usr/lib/python3.5/zipfile.py\", line 1093, in _RealGetContents     raise BadZipFile(\"File is not a zip file\") zipfile.BadZipFile: File is not a zip file We would appreciate it if you created a bug report at https://launchpad.net/snapcraft/+filebug with the above text included.","author":"~dannybombastic","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1822197","summary":"User reports BadZipFile error when snapcraft tries to pull a source file. No maintainer response, 7+ years old.","suggested_action":"close_not_a_bug","suggested_action_reason":"The error 'File is not a zip file' is a clear user configuration issue — the source file provided to snapcraft is not a valid zip archive, which is expected behavior. The error message is already informative and guides users to file a bug report. This is not a snapcraft bug but rather a support/usage question about incorrect source configuration.","scores":{"impact":5,"quick_win":4.5,"staleness":95,"complexity":10,"confidence":80,"support_request":85},"age_days":2725,"labels":[],"created_at":"2019-03-28T21:02:44.273211+00:00","updated_at":"2019-03-28T21:02:44.273211+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":10,"support_request":85,"confidence":80,"impact":5,"quick_win":4.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":39752,"project_name":"craft-platforms","source":"github","external_id":"95","title":"docs: how-to and explanation for filtering a build plan","author":"lengau","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-platforms/pull/95","summary":"Documentation PR adding how-to guide for filtering build plans in craft-platforms. PR is 589 days old with no activity, no reviewers, and no CI checks.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"PR is 589 days old with no maintainer engagement, no comments, and no CI checks. The feature it documents (filtering build plans) still exists in the codebase (e.g., craft_platforms/rock/_build.py), but the PR itself is clearly abandoned after nearly 19 months. Documentation can be rewritten if needed.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":20.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":20,"confidence":50},"age_days":597,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-01-24T02:16:14+00:00","updated_at":"2025-01-24T02:16:14+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":20,"support_request":null,"confidence":50,"impact":25,"quick_win":20.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":28111,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1869604","title":"Fails to realize the source folder changed with Multipass","author":"~saviq","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1869604","summary":"Bug where building the same project from different source folders reuses the previous Multipass instance instead of creating a new one. 6+ years old with zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"Issue is 2346 days (~6.4 years) old with zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction. Originally cross-referenced from canonical/multipass#1452. The snapcraft remote build system has almost certainly been significantly refactored since then, making the specific behavior described unlikely to still apply. No one has reported or engaged with this in over 6 years.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":24.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"confidence":50,"support_request":10},"age_days":2358,"labels":[],"created_at":"2020-03-29T17:40:48.125825+00:00","updated_at":"2020-05-20T14:51:41.769247+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":50,"impact":40,"quick_win":24.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29051,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1647343","title":"Validator for the snap's icon appears to check the file before the snap is compiled","author":"~michael-r-milton","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1647343","summary":"Snapcraft icon validator checks file existence before compilation, contradicting docs that specify container-relative paths. No maintainer response in ~10 years; unlabelled and unassessed.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has zero comments, no labels, no assignee, and no maintainer interaction across 3556 days (~9.7 years), showing no sign of ever being categorised or prioritised. The reported bug (icon path validation running before the build stage, contradicting the metadata.md docs) is a genuine usability defect with a clear reproduction, but it cannot be confirmed whether the validation logic has since been refactored, so a maintainer needs to assess current relevance before any close or fix decision.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":22.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":45,"confidence":55,"support_request":10},"age_days":3568,"labels":[],"created_at":"2016-12-05T12:35:58.936665+00:00","updated_at":"2016-12-05T12:40:06.438448+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":45,"support_request":10,"confidence":55,"impact":40,"quick_win":22.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29110,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1664704","title":"snapcraft release gives misleading error when revision does not exist","author":"~sabdfl","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1664704","summary":"snapcraft release shows misleading error suggesting 'snapcraft register' when the real problem is a non-existent revision. Filed 2016, 0 comments, no maintainer interaction; legacy CLI since replaced by craft-based rewrite.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"Filed 2016 (3485 days), 0 comments, no maintainer interaction. The legacy Python CLI has been fully replaced by the craft-based rewrite (snapcraft 7.x+), making the original error message and code path obsolete. Related Launchpad bug #1604810 (same issue, filed by maintainer elopio) is also open with no activity for ~9.5 years, confirming this was never addressed in the legacy codebase.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":10,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":3497,"labels":["store","ui"],"created_at":"2017-02-14T20:14:41.347020+00:00","updated_at":"2017-02-14T21:13:52.999958+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":10,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":20,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29139,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1673186","title":"the gox classic snap gets stuck consuming a lot of cpu","author":"~zyga","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1673186","summary":"2016 report that a classic-confinement snap of gox hangs at startup consuming high CPU, worked around with taskset due to a separate multi-core bug. No maintainer activity in ~9 years; the referenced multi-core bug is long since fixed.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 3456 days old with 0 comments and no maintainer interaction, and it explicitly depends on a 2016-era multi-core CPU bug (\"the bug with multiple cores that Chipaca is investigating\") that has long since been fixed in snapd; the classic confinement stack has been substantially reworked since then, so the original hang is no longer reproducible on current versions. It is not merely old — the underlying condition it describes no longer exists.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":8.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":60,"confidence":65,"support_request":10},"age_days":3468,"labels":["classic","isv"],"created_at":"2017-03-15T17:06:57.249195+00:00","updated_at":"2017-08-10T00:02:24.960408+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":60,"support_request":10,"confidence":65,"impact":20,"quick_win":8.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29248,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1734400","title":"Include/exclude patterns improvements","author":"~lool","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1734400","summary":"Feature request for snapcraft parts: include/exclude file patterns are processed with all excludes winning over all includes; reporter wants includes processed last or in yaml order to support more cases. No maintainer response, no labels, 0 comments, ~8.8 years old.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no assignee, and zero comments from any maintainer, so it has never been triaged. It is a genuine feature/behavior request (not a support question) about how part file patterns are evaluated, and the underlying logic now lives in the shared craft-parts filesets implementation, so a maintainer should confirm whether the requested ordering semantics are still wanted before any change.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":55,"confidence":70,"support_request":15},"age_days":3214,"labels":[],"created_at":"2017-11-25T00:01:05.051847+00:00","updated_at":"2017-11-25T07:16:22.129100+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":55,"support_request":15,"confidence":70,"impact":40,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29265,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1739954","title":"DNS error causes cascading exception failure","author":"~rogpeppe","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1739954","summary":"Snapcraft 2.34 push dumps a raw urllib3/requests traceback (ending in a Retry TypeError) on DNS failure instead of a friendly error. 8.7 years old, no comments or labels; affected version and storeapi code long since replaced.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 3172 days old with zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer engagement, and it targets Snapcraft 2.34 whose storeapi module (snapcraft/storeapi/__init__.py in the traceback) no longer exists in the current codebase, which has a rewritten snapcraft/store/ package. The terminal TypeError is a known requests/urllib3 version-mismatch artifact fixed upstream, so the specific failure is no longer reproducible on supported versions.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":15.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":25,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":3184,"labels":[],"created_at":"2017-12-24T11:46:49.336721+00:00","updated_at":"2017-12-24T11:46:49.336721+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":25,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":20,"quick_win":15.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29311,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1750581","title":"Snapcraft’s own snap summary and description are unhelpful","author":"~mpt","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1750581","summary":"Request to rewrite the snapcraft snap's store summary and description for clarity, grammar, and capitalization. 8.5 years old with zero comments, labels, or maintainer interaction; current store listing state unverified.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no comments, no assignee, and zero maintainer interaction across its 3114-day lifetime, so it has never been assessed. It is a trivial cosmetic content fix (rewriting a few lines of store metadata), but I could not verify whether the quoted text ('easily create snaps', 'into Snappy enabled system') still appears on snapcraft.io/snapcraft, so a human should check the live listing before deciding to close as stale or address it.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":13.5,"staleness":95,"complexity":10,"confidence":65,"support_request":15},"age_days":3126,"labels":[],"created_at":"2018-02-20T14:41:56.452047+00:00","updated_at":"2018-02-20T14:51:57.613565+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":10,"support_request":15,"confidence":65,"impact":15,"quick_win":13.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29347,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1768248","title":"remote parts should be able to specify layouts","author":"~gerboland","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1768248","summary":"Feature request to allow remote parts to specify layout options, motivated by an Xwayland kiosk helper use-case. Open since 2017 with zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is a feature request (not a bug) with no labels, no comments, and no maintainer acknowledgement in over 8 years, so it has never been triaged. It is not a candidate for close_stale because layouts remain a supported snapcraft feature (docs/how-to/crafting/use-layouts.rst) and the request to extend layouts to remote parts may still be relevant, but it also is not clearly outdated. It needs a maintainer to assess whether remote-part layouts are feasible or intentionally unsupported.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":12.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":60,"confidence":70,"support_request":20},"age_days":3056,"labels":[],"created_at":"2018-05-01T13:29:21.549442+00:00","updated_at":"2018-05-01T13:29:21.549442+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":60,"support_request":20,"confidence":70,"impact":30,"quick_win":12.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29270,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1741091","title":" Installing snapcraft (and its dependencies)","author":"~tanesh","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1741091","summary":"Reports a missing 'cd snapcraft' step in the HACKING.md install guide. Open 8+ years with zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction; the referenced HACKING.md no longer exists at the repo root (docs restructured into docs/contribute/).","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 3162 days old with 0 comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction, and the referenced guide (HACKING.md at master) no longer exists in the repo layout — docs have been reorganized under docs/contribute/. The original problem is no longer applicable to the current project structure, so it is both inactive and irrelevant.","scores":{"impact":10,"quick_win":9.5,"staleness":95,"complexity":5,"confidence":75,"support_request":15},"age_days":3174,"labels":[],"created_at":"2018-01-03T17:45:30.570039+00:00","updated_at":"2018-01-03T17:45:30.570039+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":5,"support_request":15,"confidence":75,"impact":10,"quick_win":9.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29848,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1987421","title":"Add support for a version of `${shlibs:Depends}` to `snapcraft.yaml`","author":"~saviq","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1987421","summary":"Feature request to add ${shlibs:Depends} shorthand for automatic staging of shared library packages. Untriaged, no maintainer response in 1470 days.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has never been assessed by a maintainer — zero comments, no labels, no assignee, and no activity for 1470 days. While the feature request (auto-staging packages for shared library SONAME changes) could improve developer experience, there is no evidence it has been implemented elsewhere or is no longer relevant. A maintainer needs to evaluate whether this is still desired and how it fits into the current project roadmap.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"confidence":60,"support_request":20},"age_days":1481,"labels":["craft-1290"],"created_at":"2022-08-23T16:15:14.253184+00:00","updated_at":"2022-08-24T19:28:41.714184+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"support_request":20,"confidence":60,"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":28094,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1834207","title":"removing parts should clean stage and prime… stages?","author":"~saviq","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1834207","summary":"Bug report from 2017: removing a part from snapcraft.yaml does not clean its contents from stage/prime, so the built snap still includes the removed part's files. No labels, no comments, no maintainer activity in ~7 years.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 2624 days old (~7 years) with zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction. It references a specific commit (7f4e951) and PR #850 from the multipass project circa 2017. The snapcraft codebase has undergone major rewrites since then (the current repo layout shows a modern parts/ directory structure), making it highly likely this behavior has been addressed or the reproduction is no longer valid. However, without tool access to verify whether the fix landed, confidence is moderate — a maintainer should confirm before closing.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"confidence":55,"support_request":10},"age_days":2636,"labels":[],"created_at":"2019-06-25T14:14:07.265613+00:00","updated_at":"2019-10-03T20:52:16.748181+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":55,"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":28128,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1903046","title":"Progressive release stops showing metrics when set to 100% target","author":"~noise","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1903046","summary":"snapcraft status stops showing progressive release metrics once target reaches 100%. Reported 5.8 years ago with zero maintainer interaction, no labels, and no comments. Progressive release feature has since evolved (PR #6189 merged).","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 2125 days old with zero comments, no labels, and last activity 819 days ago. The progressive release feature has evolved significantly since the report, as evidenced by merged PR #6189 (feat: show progressive percentage in release output), making the specific reported behavior likely no longer reproducible in the current codebase.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":17.5,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"confidence":55,"support_request":10},"age_days":2137,"labels":[],"created_at":"2020-11-05T13:48:53.897083+00:00","updated_at":"2024-06-03T14:48:57.094099+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"support_request":10,"confidence":55,"impact":25,"quick_win":17.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29372,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1780061","title":"Can't read lxd info with german locale","author":"~neothethird","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1780061","summary":"Snapcraft cleanbuild fails to parse lxc info output under a German locale, breaking container architecture detection. Reported in 2018, no maintainer activity; current codebase no longer parses lxc info output.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is from 2018 (2980 days old) with zero comments and no maintainer interaction. The current codebase contains no matches for 'lxc info' or 'Failed to detect container architecture', indicating the affected code path has been removed or refactored away, so the original problem is no longer reproducible in the current version.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":14.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":2993,"labels":[],"created_at":"2018-07-04T08:45:46.572707+00:00","updated_at":"2019-01-03T15:32:23.385828+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":20,"quick_win":14.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29326,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1754010","title":"Dump follows symlink and fails","author":"~r4co0n","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1754010","summary":"Dump plugin in snapcraft 2.39.3 follows relative symlinks during copy, causing IsADirectoryError in _migrate_files during staging. Legacy 2.x code path no longer exists; current craft-parts dump plugin uses cp --no-dereference.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"Issue references snapcraft 2.39.3 with stack trace in snapcraft/internal/pluginhandler/ which no longer exists in the current codebase (now snapcraft/parts/). The new craft-parts dump plugin uses 'cp --archive --link --no-dereference' which correctly preserves symlinks. 3099 days old with zero comments or labels.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"confidence":85,"support_request":10},"age_days":3111,"labels":[],"created_at":"2018-03-07T11:55:52.965842+00:00","updated_at":"2018-03-07T11:55:52.965842+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":85,"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29449,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1804682","title":"Warn when python plugin is used for non-setuptools project","author":"~merlijn-sebrechts","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1804682","summary":"Request to add a clear warning/error when snapcraft's python plugin is used on non-setuptools projects. References snapcraft 2.43.1; the old plugin architecture has been fully replaced in modern snapcraft.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue references snapcraft 2.43.1 (python3.5 era) and the old `python` plugin that relied on setuptools. The current snapcraft codebase has a completely rewritten plugin architecture (snapcraft/parts, snapcraft/extensions) where that specific plugin no longer exists. 2839 days old with zero comments, labels, or maintainer interaction.","scores":{"impact":5,"quick_win":3.5,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"confidence":75,"support_request":20},"age_days":2851,"labels":[],"created_at":"2018-11-22T16:55:51.095715+00:00","updated_at":"2018-11-22T16:55:51.095715+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"support_request":20,"confidence":75,"impact":5,"quick_win":3.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":28234,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1608932","title":"multiple parts with same git repo makes build checkout out redundant repos","author":"~adam-stokes","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1608932","summary":"snapcraft 2.13.1: parts sharing the same git source each get their own checkout instead of a shared cache. No maintainer activity for ~9.5 years; the 2.x series is EOL and modern craft-parts-based snapcraft uses a shared source cache.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue targets snapcraft 2.13.1 (core16-era 2.x), which is no longer supported, and has had zero comments or maintainer interaction for ~9.5 years. The modern craft-parts-based snapcraft shares git source checkouts via a source cache, so the reported per-part redundant checkouts no longer apply to current versions. Confidence is moderate because repo inspection was unavailable to directly confirm the source-cache behavior in code.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":15.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"confidence":60,"support_request":10},"age_days":3693,"labels":["conjure","sources"],"created_at":"2016-08-02T12:49:15.961217+00:00","updated_at":"2017-03-19T20:14:22.066153+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":60,"impact":25,"quick_win":15.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29436,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1802256","title":"go plugin: support Go modules","author":"~rogpeppe","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1802256","summary":"Feature request for first-class Go modules support in the Go plugin. Now implemented: craft-parts' go plugin is go.mod-based (craft-parts#78), and snapcraft#3133 added go.mod support to the old v1 plugin. No activity for ~8 years.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The requested capability has been implemented elsewhere: craft-parts#78 merged a go.mod-based Go plugin (current craft_parts/plugins/go_plugin.py documents 'A plugin for go projects using go.mod' and runs 'go mod download all'), and snapcraft#3133 added go.mod support to the legacy v1 plugin. The issue is ~8 years old with zero comments, so it is both inactive and no longer applicable.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":10.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":50,"confidence":85,"support_request":10},"age_days":2866,"labels":[],"created_at":"2018-11-08T08:36:32.270341+00:00","updated_at":"2019-08-21T17:19:19.284941+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":50,"support_request":10,"confidence":85,"impact":20,"quick_win":10.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29323,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1752957","title":"Building classic snap without core snap installed succeeds, but creates snap that doesn't run","author":"~kyrofa","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1752957","summary":"Snapcraft 2.39.x crashes with TypeError building a classic snap without the core snap installed, as get_core_dynamic_linker() returns None during patchelf. No comments or labels; 2.x series is EOL and the code path no longer exists in the current codebase.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has had zero comments or labels and no activity for ~3079 days, and it targets snapcraft 2.39.x, a long-EOL 2.x release. The current repo layout shows the old snapcraft/internal/ tree (elf.py, pluginhandler) from the traceback has been replaced by the rewritten snapcraft/elf and snapcraft/parts modules, so the reported code path no longer exists and the problem is no longer reproducible in current versions.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":26.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":35,"confidence":65,"support_request":10},"age_days":3116,"labels":[],"created_at":"2018-03-02T19:15:00.302520+00:00","updated_at":"2018-03-27T19:09:16.122096+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":35,"support_request":10,"confidence":65,"impact":40,"quick_win":26.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":28495,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1594794","title":"Embedded version required in snapcraft.yaml","author":"~stub","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1594794","summary":"Feature request from 2014 to let snapcraft.yaml's version key reference a part name so the version is derived from the plugin (e.g. Python setup.py) for Launchpad auto-builds. 10 years old, zero comments, no labels, no maintainer engagement; targets obsolete snapcraft 1.x.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 3723 days old (~10 years) with last activity 3500 days ago, 0 comments, no labels, and an external contributor, showing zero maintainer engagement. Its example (plugin: python3, source: lp:juju-deployer) reflects the snapcraft 1.x era, which has since been rewritten multiple times (craft-parts-based 7.x), and the proposed mechanism (version key accepting a part name) was never adopted, so the request as written no longer maps to the current architecture.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":15.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"confidence":55,"support_request":20},"age_days":3735,"labels":[],"created_at":"2016-06-21T12:38:57.449018+00:00","updated_at":"2017-01-30T15:02:33.829433+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"support_request":20,"confidence":55,"impact":25,"quick_win":15.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29325,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1753995","title":"patchelf warning / binary segfaults","author":"~sajoupa","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1753995","summary":"2018 report: snapcraft 2.39.2 patchelf step warns 'cannot find section' on a Go binary (telegraf) and the resulting snap segfaults (core-dump). No maintainer response. Referenced LP bug lp:1736861 is closed as resolved. Affected version long superseded.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has had zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction for ~6.8 years (last activity 2486 days ago), and it targets snapcraft 2.39.2 (2018), a version long superseded by the current codebase whose ELF/patchelf handling has been restructured (snapcraft/elf/ module). The closely related LP bug lp:1736861, which the reporter cites as 'fix released', is closed as resolved in a subsequent release, so the original problem is no longer applicable to current snapcraft.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":15.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":3111,"labels":[],"created_at":"2018-03-07T11:01:28.038516+00:00","updated_at":"2019-11-11T00:51:40.925784+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":25,"quick_win":15.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29439,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1802345","title":"can't build python part with C modules","author":"~ack","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1802345","summary":"Snapcraft python plugin fails to build Python packages with C extensions because C headers (e.g. Python.h) are not found; reporter found a workaround by exporting C_INCLUDE_PATH=/usr/include/python3.6. No maintainer response or labels; issue is ~7 years old and targets core18/core16 bases.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 2853 days old with zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction. It targets core18/core16 bases (snapcraft 2.43.1/3.0) which are no longer supported; the current craft-parts python plugin (which snapcraft now uses) still does not set C_INCLUDE_PATH, but the original report's environment (core18, python3.6, snapcraft 3.0) is long obsolete. A reporter on a supported base (core22/core24) would need to confirm the issue still reproduces before it can be acted on.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":28.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":2865,"labels":[],"created_at":"2018-11-08T17:13:24.733830+00:00","updated_at":"2019-07-04T13:58:44.740519+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":40,"quick_win":28.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29421,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1797378","title":"Built executable is not copied to prime/bin/","author":"~sangbum","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1797378","summary":"Snapcraft 2.43.1+18.4 crashes during prime with FileNotFoundError when an app's command points to a file (prettier) that was not copied to prime/bin/; build/bin/ only contained prettier.js. Reported 8 years ago, no maintainer activity, 0 comments, unlabelled.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 2881 days (~8 years) old with zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction. It targets snapcraft 2.43.1+18.4, a long-EOL 2.x release whose code path (snapcraft/internal/meta/_snap_packaging.py) no longer exists in the current codebase (now snapcraft/meta/snap_packaging.py). A similar Launchpad bug (1884683) confirms the same 2.x FileNotFoundError pattern is considered obsolete. The underlying problem — an app command referencing a file not present in prime/bin/ — is a user configuration error (the build only produced prettier.js, not prettier), not a snapcraft bug, and the current codebase has been entirely restructured since.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":21.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"confidence":70,"support_request":40},"age_days":2893,"labels":[],"created_at":"2018-10-11T13:15:01.433587+00:00","updated_at":"2018-10-11T13:15:01.433587+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"support_request":40,"confidence":70,"impact":30,"quick_win":21.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29367,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1778699","title":"appstream extractor should search valid directories","author":"~apachelogger","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1778699","summary":"Feature request from 2018 asking the appstream extractor to search standard directories (usr/share/appinfo, usr/share/metainfo, PWD) instead of requiring full paths in parse-info. Still open with zero comments and no maintainer engagement; current code still takes a full relative path.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 8 years old with zero comments and no labels beyond release tags, showing no maintainer assessment. The requested behavior is not implemented — snapcraft/meta/appstream.py extract() still requires a full relative path via os.path.join(workdir, relpath) with no directory search. It's a valid feature request but needs triage to decide whether to implement or close as stale.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":16.25,"staleness":95,"complexity":35,"confidence":75,"support_request":10},"age_days":3000,"labels":["19.04","19.04-blue","19.04-external"],"created_at":"2018-06-26T10:35:17.056914+00:00","updated_at":"2018-12-13T16:15:15.417647+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":35,"support_request":10,"confidence":75,"impact":25,"quick_win":16.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29334,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1760897","title":"Classic confined snap started segfaulting after 2.40 upgrade","author":"~kos.tsakalozos","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1760897","summary":"2018 report that a classic confined snap (kubernetes-test) segfaults when built with snapcraft 2.40 due to patchelf/ELF buildid stripping; reporter found a no-patchelf workaround. No maintainer response in 8+ years; affected version long superseded.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 8+ years old with zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction, and the reporter already has a working workaround (no-patchelf). The affected snapcraft 2.40 is long superseded and the ELF/patchelf code has since been rewritten (snapcraft/elf/), so the original problem is no longer reproducible in current versions; the related 2.37 regression (LP #1736861) was resolved in a later release.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":8.25,"staleness":95,"complexity":45,"confidence":80,"support_request":40},"age_days":3084,"labels":[],"created_at":"2018-04-03T15:03:05.278359+00:00","updated_at":"2018-04-26T15:18:39.190772+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":45,"support_request":40,"confidence":80,"impact":15,"quick_win":8.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29029,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1637563","title":"Add ability to automatically fetch Recommends from (a subset of) stage packages","author":"~3v1n0","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1637563","summary":"Feature request for a stage-packages-with-recommends flag so snap Recommends are auto-fetched from stage packages instead of listed manually. Open ~10 years with no labels, comments, or maintainer interaction.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has zero labels, zero comments, and no maintainer response in ~10 years, so it has never been assessed; however, closing as stale would require evidence the feature was implemented elsewhere or is no longer applicable, which could not be verified (repo/code search tools were unavailable and no related issues surfaced). A maintainer should decide whether this long-unaddressed feature request is still wanted.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":13.75,"staleness":95,"complexity":45,"confidence":55,"support_request":10},"age_days":3606,"labels":[],"created_at":"2016-10-28T15:47:41.907556+00:00","updated_at":"2016-10-28T15:47:41.907556+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":45,"support_request":10,"confidence":55,"impact":25,"quick_win":13.75,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29037,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1640721","title":"Feature Request: Would be nice to have a way to refresh .deb files","author":"~aacid","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1640721","summary":"Feature request to refresh only changed .deb files in a snap build instead of re-downloading the full ~300MB set. Open since 2017 with no labels, comments, or maintainer activity.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 3581 days old (~10 years) with zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction. The underlying architecture has changed significantly since then — craft-parts now has a dedicated deb plugin with primed stage package tracking (commits like 'executor: store primed stage packages in prime state' and 'packages: preserve architecture in primed stage packages') that addresses incremental package handling in a different way than originally requested. The original unity8-snap context is long obsolete.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":12.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":60,"confidence":70,"support_request":0},"age_days":3594,"labels":[],"created_at":"2016-11-10T09:07:21.661040+00:00","updated_at":"2016-11-10T09:17:23.478047+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":60,"support_request":0,"confidence":70,"impact":30,"quick_win":12.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29039,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1640897","title":"snapcraft doesn't validate gadget.yaml","author":"~elopio","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1640897","summary":"Feature request from 2015 asking snapcraft to validate gadget.yaml metadata for gadget snaps instead of just copying it. Open for nearly 10 years with no labels, comments, or maintainer activity.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 3581 days old with zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction, and it references 'the next release of snapcraft' adding the gadget type — a release that shipped nearly a decade ago. The gadget snap ecosystem (core18/core22 image builds) has matured substantially since, so the original framing is outdated; if gadget.yaml validation is still missing, a fresh issue with a current reproducer would be more actionable. Confidence is moderate because code inspection tools failed (pinned-SHA errors), so I could not confirm whether validation was added in the meantime.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":19.25,"staleness":95,"complexity":45,"confidence":55,"support_request":10},"age_days":3593,"labels":[],"created_at":"2016-11-10T18:53:03.453156+00:00","updated_at":"2016-11-10T18:53:03.453156+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":45,"support_request":10,"confidence":55,"impact":35,"quick_win":19.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29209,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1719348","title":"meson plugin builds to /usr/local by default","author":"~popey","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1719348","summary":"Meson plugin defaults install prefix to /usr/local; reporter argues /usr is a more sensible default for snaps. Open since 2017 with zero comments, no labels beyond 'bitesize', and no maintainer response.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 3262 days old with 0 comments and no maintainer acknowledgement, so it has never been triaged. The 'bitesize' label suggests someone may have tagged it, but there is no discussion, no reproducer, and no confirmation of whether the default still applies in the current meson plugin. A maintainer needs to verify current behavior before deciding whether to change the default (a backward-compatibility-sensitive change) or close it.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":26.25,"staleness":95,"complexity":25,"confidence":55,"support_request":15},"age_days":3274,"labels":["bitesize"],"created_at":"2017-09-25T15:30:36.349800+00:00","updated_at":"2017-10-05T13:01:26.511524+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":25,"support_request":15,"confidence":55,"impact":35,"quick_win":26.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29075,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1655832","title":"App name in snapcraft.yaml must match case of .desktop file","author":"~chris.macnaughton","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1655832","summary":"Snapcraft breaks the .desktop file Exec line when the app name case in snapcraft.yaml mismatches the .desktop filename. Reported 2016, untriaged, no maintainer response, inactive 9 years.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 3519 days old with zero comments and no maintainer interaction, but the current codebase has been substantially refactored (desktop_file.py now uses configparser with optionxform=str and guards Exec handling). It's unclear whether the original case-mismatch bug still reproduces in the current version, so a maintainer needs to verify before closing or fixing.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":21.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"confidence":55,"support_request":10},"age_days":3531,"labels":["capitalized-app-name"],"created_at":"2017-01-12T06:10:01.752852+00:00","updated_at":"2017-11-21T10:40:32.437299+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":55,"impact":35,"quick_win":21.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":39861,"project_name":"craft-providers","source":"github","external_id":"723","title":"feat(bases): make BaseName compatible with craft-platforms","author":"lengau","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-providers/pull/723","summary":"Adds convenience methods to BaseName for craft-platforms compatibility and deprecates DistroBase. Inactive for 570 days with no reviewers or CI.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The PR has been inactive for 570 days with zero reviewer engagement, zero comments, and no CI checks. The author (a maintainer) has not followed up, suggesting the feature is no longer a current priority. The craft-platforms integration may have been handled differently or the project has evolved since this was proposed.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"confidence":70},"age_days":584,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-02-05T21:59:13+00:00","updated_at":"2025-02-11T16:39:35+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"support_request":null,"confidence":70,"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29078,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1658765","title":"[Godeps] Specifying source tag fails to stage","author":"~nskaggs","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1658765","summary":"Godeps plugin fails to stage when source-tag is specified: git pull of the tag ref errors with 'cannot update the ref HEAD: non-commit object'. Reported ~2016, no maintainer activity, no labels.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is ~9.6 years old (3507 days) with zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction. The godeps plugin (go-importpath) has since been removed from snapcraft in favor of the go plugin, and the underlying git tag-pull bug (treating tags as branches, cf. Launchpad bug 1687967) is no longer relevant to current code. The affected workflow is obsolete, so the issue is no longer applicable.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":9.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":55,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":3519,"labels":[],"created_at":"2017-01-23T18:23:11.513087+00:00","updated_at":"2017-01-23T18:23:11.513087+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":55,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":20,"quick_win":9.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29097,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1662932","title":"history command shows duplicate channels","author":"~joetalbott","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1662932","summary":"2017 report that snapcraft history prints duplicate channel names in its output table. No labels, comments, or maintainer response in ~9.5 years. The CLI and channel tracking have since been fully rewritten, so the old code path is gone.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 3491 days old with zero comments and no maintainer engagement, and it targets the pre-2017 history implementation whose output format (Rev./Uploaded/Arch/Version/Channels table) no longer exists in the current craft-based snapcraft codebase. The original problem is no longer reproducible in the rewritten CLI, so it is obsolete rather than merely inactive.","scores":{"impact":10,"quick_win":8.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":20,"confidence":75,"support_request":0},"age_days":3503,"labels":[],"created_at":"2017-02-08T15:38:21.236411+00:00","updated_at":"2017-02-08T15:38:21.236411+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":20,"support_request":0,"confidence":75,"impact":10,"quick_win":8.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29090,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1661463","title":"parser doesn't pull in dependent parts from the origin","author":"~joetalbott","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1661463","summary":"Snapcraft parser fails to include 'after' parts (e.g. libmbim, libqmi) referenced from a remote git origin, erroring 'not defined in the parts entry'. 9.5 years old, no labels or maintainer activity; the origin-based parts feature is likely gone in modern rewrites.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 3497 days (~9.5 years) old with 0 comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction, so it is clearly inactive. The reported behavior (pulling 'after' parts from a remote git 'origin') belongs to an early snapcraft parser; the current repo layout (snapcraft/parts, snapcraft/models, snapcraft/commands) reflects the modern Python-based rewrite where that origin feature and the 'not defined in the parts entry' error no longer exist, so the original problem is no longer reproducible. Code inspection was unavailable (tooling returned 'No pinned SHA'), which is why confidence is moderate rather than high.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":12.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"confidence":55,"support_request":10},"age_days":3509,"labels":[],"created_at":"2017-02-03T01:34:36.523241+00:00","updated_at":"2017-02-03T01:34:36.523241+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":55,"impact":20,"quick_win":12.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29098,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1663052","title":"No Fish shell support","author":"~joeborg","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1663052","summary":"Feature request for Fish shell completion support, filed ~9.5 years ago. Body only says a PR was created on GitHub, with no link, no labels, and zero comments or maintainer interaction since.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is ~9.5 years old with zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer response; its entire body is a dangling reference to an unlinked GitHub PR ('Have created a PR in GitHub') that is long dead, leaving no standalone actionable request. I could not verify via tools whether Fish completion was later added, so the irrelevance rests on the dead contribution path rather than confirmed implementation.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":21.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"confidence":55,"support_request":55},"age_days":3503,"labels":[],"created_at":"2017-02-08T22:51:02.073411+00:00","updated_at":"2017-02-24T23:15:48.730676+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"support_request":55,"confidence":55,"impact":30,"quick_win":21.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29119,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1666639","title":"unusual mode 'rwxr-xr-x' for symlink '","author":"~joeborg","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1666639","summary":"2015 report that a click-app build on myapps.developer.ubuntu.com failed with 'unusual mode rwxr-xr-x for symlink' warnings. No labels, no comments, no maintainer response in ~9.5 years; the referenced build portal no longer exists.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 3478 days old with zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer engagement, and it references a myapps.developer.ubuntu.com click-app build — a portal that has since been shut down — so the reported failure is no longer reproducible in the current snapcraft build system. The 'unusual mode' message is snapcraft's expected warning for symlinks not at the conventional 0777 mode, so the reporter's 0755 symlinks were the actual problem, leaving no open defect to track.","scores":{"impact":10,"quick_win":7.5,"staleness":95,"complexity":25,"confidence":75,"support_request":70},"age_days":3490,"labels":[],"created_at":"2017-02-21T19:19:21.222271+00:00","updated_at":"2017-02-21T19:19:21.222271+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":25,"support_request":70,"confidence":75,"impact":10,"quick_win":7.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29504,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1815171","title":"Snapcraft could show the traceback rather than just offer to send it to LP","author":"~sabdfl","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1815171","summary":"Feature request to display the full Python traceback in the terminal when snapcraft crashes, rather than only offering to anonymously send it to Launchpad. Open since 2018, no maintainer activity, and the referenced snapcraft 3.1 error flow no longer exists in the current codebase.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is from 2018 (snapcraft 3.1 era) with zero comments and no maintainer interaction in ~7.5 years. The exact 'Sorry, an error occurred' prompt and the internal/project_loader code paths it references no longer exist in the current codebase — the project has since been rewritten (snapcraft 8.x/9.x with a different architecture), so the original problem is no longer reproducible as described. The underlying UX idea (showing tracebacks) may still be relevant, but this specific report is outdated.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":24.5,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":2774,"labels":[],"created_at":"2019-02-08T07:39:12.982722+00:00","updated_at":"2019-02-14T02:27:29.464155+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":35,"quick_win":24.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":28381,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1903854","title":"desktop file Icon: relative search for case where prefix is not /usr","author":"~cjp256","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1903854","summary":"Snapcraft desktop file Icon path resolution fails when Meson prefix is not /usr; suggests searching relative to the desktop file. Open since 2019, no comments, no labels, no maintainer response.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction in over 5 years (last activity 2013 days ago). While the underlying problem (hard-coded /usr prefix for desktop file Icon paths) may still be relevant, there is no evidence it has been addressed or that the reporter is still engaged. A maintainer should assess whether the current icon resolution logic (e.g., commits like 'feat: resolve icon names from the hicolor theme' or 'feat: mediate desktop, icon, and manifest files') already handles this case before deciding to close or implement.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":21.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"confidence":55,"support_request":10},"age_days":2131,"labels":[],"created_at":"2020-11-11T12:40:53.362412+00:00","updated_at":"2021-02-25T13:53:07.047014+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":55,"impact":35,"quick_win":21.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29491,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1812435","title":"python snap fails to build no such file or directory in prime/bin","author":"~dwoot","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1812435","summary":"Snapcraft 2.43.1 crashes with FileNotFoundError when an app's command is missing from prime/bin during snap packaging. Reported 2782 days ago with no comments, labels, or maintainer response. The legacy code path no longer exists in the current codebase.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 2782 days old with zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction. The traceback references snapcraft 2.43.1 and the legacy _snap_packaging.py code path, which no longer exists in the current codebase (confirmed by grep). The current codebase already has a proper error check for missing commands (commit 44930f709, PR #3321, 'meta: add error check for command not found'), meaning the underlying problem has been addressed with a clearer error message. The issue is both inactive and no longer applicable to the current version.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":14.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"confidence":75,"support_request":70},"age_days":2794,"labels":[],"created_at":"2019-01-18T20:12:57.623505+00:00","updated_at":"2019-01-18T20:25:43.376747+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"support_request":70,"confidence":75,"impact":20,"quick_win":14.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29234,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1731003","title":"node app builds forked, but not referencing upstream source","author":"~popey","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1731003","summary":"Snapcraft 2.34 node plugin fails to build when source is a remote URL (rimraf not found, node_modules missing) while a local checkout builds fine. 8.8 years old, zero maintainer interaction; the 2.x node plugin has since been rewritten in snapcraft 8.x.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The reporter targets snapcraft 2.34 from candidate (2017), and the issue has had zero comments or maintainer interaction for 3218 days. The 2.x node plugin no longer exists in the current codebase (snapcraft 8.x has a rewritten parts system under snapcraft/parts/), so the affected version is no longer supported and the original problem is not reproducible on a current release. Closing as stale is appropriate rather than triaging, since no current-version relevance can be established.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":8.25,"staleness":95,"complexity":45,"confidence":75,"support_request":10},"age_days":3230,"labels":["plugin"],"created_at":"2017-11-08T16:54:41.323754+00:00","updated_at":"2017-11-08T16:59:47.155604+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":45,"support_request":10,"confidence":75,"impact":15,"quick_win":8.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29284,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1744013","title":"snap does not support revocation of signing keys","author":"~vilvo","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1744013","summary":"Reports that snapcraft's model assertion signing process (snap sign) provides no way to revoke signing keys. 8.6 years old with zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction; unverified whether the store now supports key revocation.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, zero comments, and no maintainer acknowledgement in 3147 days, showing no sign of ever being triaged. However, close_stale is not justified because I could not verify (code inspection tools returned 'No pinned SHA available' errors) that key revocation was implemented elsewhere, and the snap sign model-assertion workflow still exists, so the gap may still be open. A maintainer should confirm whether the store now supports key revocation before deciding.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":13.5,"staleness":95,"complexity":55,"confidence":55,"support_request":30},"age_days":3160,"labels":[],"created_at":"2018-01-18T09:43:25.643214+00:00","updated_at":"2018-01-18T09:43:47.458897+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":55,"support_request":30,"confidence":55,"impact":30,"quick_win":13.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29341,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1764100","title":"pyqt5 cannot load xcb plugin","author":"~ihaywood3","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1764100","summary":"PyQt5 snap fails to load xcb platform plugin due to undefined Qt symbol in libQt5XcbQpa, indicating a Qt library version mismatch. 8+ years old, zero comments, no labels, no maintainer interaction.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 3060 days (~8.4 years) old with zero comments, zero labels, and no maintainer interaction. The underlying problem — a Qt library ABI mismatch causing an undefined symbol in the xcb platform plugin — is a well-known snap packaging issue that has been addressed through the desktop-qt5 extension (present in the current codebase under extensions/desktop/) and improved snapcraft tooling. The original DEXBot snap and the snapcraft version from that era are no longer relevant to the current project.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":9.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"confidence":70,"support_request":75},"age_days":3072,"labels":[],"created_at":"2018-04-15T10:48:08.546270+00:00","updated_at":"2018-04-15T10:48:08.546270+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"support_request":75,"confidence":70,"impact":15,"quick_win":9.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29331,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1760514","title":"cannot change profile for the next exec call: No such file or directory","author":"~popey","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1760514","summary":"Snapcraft 2.40 container build (SNAPCRAFT_CONTAINER_BUILDS=1) fails on re-run after a failed build with 'cannot change profile for the next exec call: No such file or directory'; a clean fixes it. Unlabeled, no maintainer response, 0 comments, ~8.4 years old.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no assignee, and zero comments — no sign a maintainer has ever assessed it, so it defaults to needs_triage. It is a genuine bug report (reproducible container-exec failure on re-run, fixed by clean) rather than a support question, but it is ~8.4 years old and targets snapcraft 2.40/snapd 2.32.1 on 16.04, a long-unsupported stack, so it is very stale and likely no longer reproducible on current versions.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":14.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":65,"confidence":55,"support_request":25},"age_days":3086,"labels":[],"created_at":"2018-04-02T00:02:11.122556+00:00","updated_at":"2018-04-24T09:59:12.727240+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":65,"support_request":25,"confidence":55,"impact":40,"quick_win":14.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29161,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1683823","title":"snapstore returns multiple instances of the same publication (was snapcraft list-revisions showing multiple publications in the same channel)","author":"~apw","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1683823","summary":"2017 bug report: snapcraft list-revisions displayed duplicate channel entries (e.g. 'edge*, edge*, edge*') per revision. No maintainer activity in 7 years. The revisions command has since been rewritten to use a set for channels, structurally preventing duplicates.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is from 2017 with zero comments and no maintainer engagement. The revisions command was rewritten in PR #3329 to use the releases API, and the current implementation in snapcraft/commands/status.py uses a Python set for channels (channels: set[str] = set()), which structurally prevents the duplicate channel display reported here. The original problem is no longer reproducible in the current codebase.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":12.75,"staleness":95,"complexity":15,"confidence":78,"support_request":5},"age_days":3434,"labels":["apw-snappy"],"created_at":"2017-04-18T14:29:35.216377+00:00","updated_at":"2019-10-15T11:43:32.042902+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":15,"support_request":5,"confidence":78,"impact":15,"quick_win":12.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29298,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1747097","title":"patch fewer elf files","author":"~jamesh","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1747097","summary":"Optimization proposal to reduce patchelf usage on ELF files in classic snaps by only patching executables and dlopen targets via DT_SONAME/DT_NEEDED analysis. Open since 2017 with zero comments, labels, or maintainer interaction.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"No labels, no comments, no assignee, and zero maintainer interaction over 8+ years. The underlying ELF patching mechanism still exists in the codebase (DT_SONAME and DT_NEEDED are still referenced in snapcraft/elf/), so the optimization idea remains technically valid but has never been assessed, labelled, or prioritized by a maintainer.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":14.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":60,"confidence":75,"support_request":10},"age_days":3144,"labels":[],"created_at":"2018-02-03T01:07:00.983439+00:00","updated_at":"2018-04-24T09:53:21.780693+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":60,"support_request":10,"confidence":75,"impact":35,"quick_win":14.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29222,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1723720","title":"“snapcraft register” with invalid characters still blathers on about name ownership","author":"~mpt","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1723720","summary":"snapcraft register prints a lengthy name-ownership preamble and prompt before validating the name, so invalid names like 'Firefox' get confusing output. Unlabeled, 0 comments, inactive ~8.8 years; the register command/prompt no longer exists in current snapcraft.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 3242 days old with 0 comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction. Related bug 1886223 (same register prompt) is documented as obsolete because the referenced register command/prompt no longer exists in current snapcraft, so the reported behavior is no longer applicable. Direct code verification was blocked (repo tooling returned 'No pinned SHA'), which caps confidence slightly.","scores":{"impact":10,"quick_win":8.5,"staleness":95,"complexity":15,"confidence":75,"support_request":5},"age_days":3254,"labels":[],"created_at":"2017-10-15T10:23:34.371232+00:00","updated_at":"2017-11-20T11:21:21.240132+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":15,"support_request":5,"confidence":75,"impact":10,"quick_win":8.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29233,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1730208","title":"Snapcraft python build fails to run with `GLIBC_2.25' not found error message","author":"~manuvarkey-gmail","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1730208","summary":"Snapcraft python plugin build on Ubuntu 17.10 fails at runtime with GLIBC_2.25 not found, a base/host glibc mismatch. 8+ years inactive, zero comments, no labels; EOL OS and obsolete snapcraft 2.34.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 3221 days old with 0 comments and no maintainer interaction, and it targets Ubuntu 17.10 (EOL since 2018) with snapcraft 2.34 — a version no longer supported by any current snapcraft release. The GLIBC_2.25 error is an environment/base mismatch on an unsupported host, not a reproducible bug in current code, so it is both inactive and no longer applicable.","scores":{"impact":10,"quick_win":8.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":20,"confidence":75,"support_request":80},"age_days":3233,"labels":[],"created_at":"2017-11-05T16:02:19.931306+00:00","updated_at":"2018-01-22T11:12:08.573601+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":20,"support_request":80,"confidence":75,"impact":10,"quick_win":8.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29988,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"2052928","title":"Pulling from private repository without known_hosts hangs forever","author":"~gbeuzeboc","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2052928","summary":"SSH pull from private repo hangs when known_hosts is missing; SSH authenticity prompt is hidden by snapcraft progress bar. Untriaged, 935 days old.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"No maintainer has responded or added labels in 935 days. The issue has clear reproduction steps and describes a real UX bug (SSH prompt hidden by progress bar), but the extreme age and lack of engagement mean it needs triage to determine if it's still relevant or has been fixed.","scores":{"impact":60,"quick_win":36.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"confidence":50,"support_request":10},"age_days":943,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-02-12T10:36:07.950064+00:00","updated_at":"2024-02-14T09:17:35.363964+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":50,"impact":60,"quick_win":36.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29453,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1804989","title":"Google Analytics brings down https://status.snapcraft.io/","author":"~techtonik","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1804989","summary":"status.snapcraft.io returned an error page when accessed with a Google Analytics _ga query parameter. No labels, no comments, no maintainer interaction for ~8 years. The status page is a separate service not in this repo.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has had zero comments, labels, or maintainer interaction for 2837 days (~8 years), and the report dates to Nov 2018 per the GA timestamp (1543132775) in the URL. The affected status.snapcraft.io service is not part of this codebase, so the bug cannot be addressed here, and the 2018-era status page infrastructure is almost certainly long since rebuilt. Confidence is moderate because I could not verify the current state of the status page (no repo access, no related issues found).","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":14.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"confidence":60,"support_request":10},"age_days":2849,"labels":[],"created_at":"2018-11-25T08:28:01.297935+00:00","updated_at":"2018-11-25T08:28:01.297935+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"support_request":10,"confidence":60,"impact":20,"quick_win":14.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29445,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1804006","title":"snapcraft.yaml root level plugs doesn't propagate to hooks","author":"~anonymouse67","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1804006","summary":"2018 report that root-level plugs in snapcraft.yaml are not propagated to the hooks section of generated snap.yaml. No maintainer activity for 7.8 years. Reporter concedes snapd applies root-level plugs to hooks by default, so behavior is likely working as intended.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction in 2842 days (~7.8 years), and the reporter themselves notes 'the root level plugs in the snap.yaml also by default cover the hooks too' in snapd, meaning the generated snap.yaml is valid and the original concern is no longer applicable. Snapcraft has also been fully rewritten (core22/core24) since this report, so the affected code paths no longer exist.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":12.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":20,"confidence":65,"support_request":20},"age_days":2854,"labels":[],"created_at":"2018-11-19T14:32:59.438175+00:00","updated_at":"2019-02-08T16:58:29.065098+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":20,"support_request":20,"confidence":65,"impact":15,"quick_win":12.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29437,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1802312","title":"Error message with empty parts is misleading","author":"~adam-collard","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1802312","summary":"Misleading snapcraft error when 'parts' is empty in snapcraft.yaml: the message conflates a schema type error with a part-name validation error. Filed ~7.8 years ago by an external contributor, no labels, no maintainer response, no comments.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 2853 days old with zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction. The reported error format ('Issues while validating snapcraft.yaml: The 'parts' property does not match the required schema') comes from the legacy jsonschema-based validation, which has been fully replaced by the pydantic/craft-grammar validation visible in the current codebase (snapcraft/models/, snapcraft/parts/), so this exact misleading message is no longer reproducible in modern snapcraft 8.x.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":12.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":20,"confidence":55,"support_request":10},"age_days":2865,"labels":[],"created_at":"2018-11-08T14:28:29.749364+00:00","updated_at":"2018-11-08T14:28:49.668914+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":20,"support_request":10,"confidence":55,"impact":15,"quick_win":12.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":30033,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"2099923","title":"Snapcraft builds are failing:  install of snap \"snapcraft\" failed","author":"~snawoot","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2099923","summary":"Snapcraft builds failing due to outdated snapd (2.61) on build infrastructure unable to install core20 base. Issue is 556 days old with no maintainer response.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"This is an infrastructure/environment issue (outdated snapd 2.61 on Launchpad build machines) rather than a snapcraft code bug. The error message itself is actionable ('try to refresh snapd'). The issue has been inactive for 556 days with no maintainer engagement, and the problem is external to this repository.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":10,"confidence":80,"support_request":85},"age_days":565,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-02-24T18:35:50.996730+00:00","updated_at":"2025-02-24T18:35:50.996730+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":10,"support_request":85,"confidence":80,"impact":20,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29210,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1719946","title":"Snapcraft has three unsynced bug lists","author":"~mpt","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1719946","summary":"Snapcraft bug reports were split across Launchpad and GitHub, causing duplicates and unclear prioritization. No activity for ~9 years. The referenced #100 signpost is now closed and the repo uses GitHub issue templates, so tracking has consolidated on GitHub.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 3260 days old with 0 comments and no maintainer interaction, and its core problem is no longer applicable: the #100 'Issues are tracked on launchpad' signpost it cites is now closed, and the repo ships .github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE files, showing the project adopted the issue's proposed GitHub-exclusive upstream tracking. Closing as resolved-by-project-evolution rather than leaving a 9-year-old process debate open.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":13.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":35,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":3272,"labels":[],"created_at":"2017-09-27T15:59:48.700238+00:00","updated_at":"2017-11-01T23:55:01.323778+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":35,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":20,"quick_win":13.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29272,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1741140","title":"wrong error when a part depends on a part with underscore","author":"~elopio","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1741140","summary":"Snapcraft reports a misleading validation error: when a part's after/before dependency uses an underscore (invalid part name), the error names the valid depending part instead of the invalid dependency. Open since 2017 with no maintainer activity; no fix found in current craft-parts/snapcraft validation code.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is a genuine bug report with a clear reproducer (after: [test_invalid_part] causes the error to point at the valid part test-valid-part), but it has zero labels, zero comments, and no maintainer response in ~8.6 years, so it shows no sign of having been triaged. The underlying validation code has since moved to craft-parts, where part-name validation and dependency checks (e.g. InvalidPartName, 'validate part dependency name') still exist, so the misleading message may still be reproducible but needs verification before closing.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":19.5,"staleness":95,"complexity":35,"confidence":60,"support_request":5},"age_days":3174,"labels":[],"created_at":"2018-01-03T23:38:36.685807+00:00","updated_at":"2018-01-03T23:38:36.685807+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":35,"support_request":5,"confidence":60,"impact":30,"quick_win":19.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29261,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1737959","title":"Value out of range error when pushing a snap to the store","author":"~flexiondotorg","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1737959","summary":"ValueError from progressbar library when pushing a ~170MB snap to the store on snapcraft 2.34-2.37. Affects obsolete 2.x codebase; the files in the traceback no longer exist in the current snapcraft 8.x codebase. No maintainer response in ~8.7 years.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 3183 days old with zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer engagement. It targets snapcraft 2.34-2.37, whose store code (snapcraft/_store.py, snapcraft/storeapi/__init__.py) has been entirely replaced in the current 8.x codebase — the current layout shows store logic under snapcraft/store/ with no progressbar dependency. The original problem is no longer reproducible in any supported version.","scores":{"impact":5,"quick_win":3.5,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"confidence":82,"support_request":10},"age_days":3195,"labels":[],"created_at":"2017-12-13T11:49:33.500984+00:00","updated_at":"2017-12-13T14:15:00.296810+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"support_request":10,"confidence":82,"impact":5,"quick_win":3.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29256,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1737136","title":"Installed gcc-multilib conflicts with gcc-5-arm-linux-gnueabihf when using --target-arch","author":"~kalikiana","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1737136","summary":"2017 report: snapcraft --target-arch=armhf pull installs gcc-multilib, which apt-conflicts with gcc-5-arm-linux-gnueabihf. No maintainer response; the --target-arch flag and host-apt build environment no longer exist in modern snapcraft.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is ~8.7 years old with zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction, and the affected code path is gone: the current repo layout shows the modern snapcraft architecture (models/parts/extensions) with no --target-arch flag or host-apt build environment, and cross-compilation now runs in containerized bases (snap build --target) rather than installing gcc-5 packages on the host. The reporter even noted the workaround (sudo apt remove gcc-multilib), so the original problem is no longer reproducible.","scores":{"impact":10,"quick_win":7.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"confidence":75,"support_request":15},"age_days":3200,"labels":[],"created_at":"2017-12-08T10:03:14.255615+00:00","updated_at":"2017-12-08T10:03:14.255615+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":30,"support_request":15,"confidence":75,"impact":10,"quick_win":7.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":3030,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"1096","title":"Spread tests should ensure that juju can correctly parse the output.","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/1096","summary":"Feature request to install juju on spread test runners so tests can verify juju can parse the built charm/bundle output. No labels, no comments, no activity in ~3.4 years; bundle support was later removed from charmcraft.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 1225 days old with zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer engagement. The premise is partly outdated: commit 2c4c7c0b (#2519) updated the juju version used in spread tests, indicating juju is now present in the test environment, and commit 2cb4db71 (#2320) removed bundle features entirely, so the 'charm/bundle' scope no longer applies. The core ask — having juju validate built artifacts in CI — is a reasonable but unaddressed test-infrastructure improvement that has been superseded by ongoing spread test evolution.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":15.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"confidence":70,"support_request":0},"age_days":1237,"labels":[],"created_at":"2023-04-24T17:41:30+00:00","updated_at":"2023-04-24T17:41:30+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"support_request":0,"confidence":70,"impact":25,"quick_win":15.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":28098,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1836526","title":"Build provider LXD uses x86-only image source","author":"~fnordahl","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1836526","summary":"LXD build provider in old Go-based snapcraft 1.x used x86-only Ubuntu Minimal Cloud images, breaking builds on arm64/s390x/ppc64el. The referenced file no longer exists; snapcraft 2.x+ uses craft-providers with multi-arch buildd images from cloud-images.ubuntu.com. Issue is 7+ years old with zero maintainer interaction.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue references snapcraft/internal/build_providers/_lxd/_images.py from the Go-based snapcraft 1.x, which has been entirely replaced by the Python-based snapcraft 2.x+ using craft-providers. The current craft-providers uses multi-arch buildd images from cloud-images.ubuntu.com/buildd/releases (not x86-only minimal cloud images), so the original problem no longer applies. The issue is 2605 days old with 0 comments and no labels, showing no maintainer engagement.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":12.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":20,"confidence":82,"support_request":0},"age_days":2617,"labels":[],"created_at":"2019-07-15T06:38:32.429684+00:00","updated_at":"2019-12-14T03:44:44.860827+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":20,"support_request":0,"confidence":82,"impact":15,"quick_win":12.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29281,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1743428","title":"Exception raised when trying to operate on a snap that I don't own nor collaborate with","author":"~nataliabidart","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1743428","summary":"Ugly traceback (KeyError in StoreReleaseError.__str__) when snapcraft release fails due to missing package_upload permission on a snap the user does not own; reported against snapcraft 2.35, no maintainer activity in ~8.6 years.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue targets snapcraft 2.35 code paths (snapcraft/storeapi/, snapcraft/_store.py, snapcraft/cli/store.py) that no longer exist in the current codebase, which uses a completely rewritten snapcraft/store/ client. The affected version is long unsupported, the issue has zero comments or labels, and a near-identical report (LP #1761488, same 'StoreReleaseError: <exception str() failed>' in 2.39.2) was closed without resolution.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":15.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":25,"confidence":85,"support_request":10},"age_days":3162,"labels":[],"created_at":"2018-01-15T17:19:21.727143+00:00","updated_at":"2018-01-15T17:19:21.727143+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":25,"support_request":10,"confidence":85,"impact":20,"quick_win":15.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29276,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1741900","title":"Add file-a-bug functionality on errors","author":"~lucyllewy","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1741900","summary":"Feature request to add file-a-bug functionality when snapcraft hits an error, offering to auto-file an issue with a traceback (flag or prompt), with duplicate detection. Open since 2017, no labels, no comments, no maintainer response.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is a genuine feature request (not a bug or support question) but shows zero signs of maintainer engagement: no labels, no comments, no assignee, and no activity for ~8 years (last activity 2920 days ago). It has never been assessed, categorised, or prioritised, so it needs triage rather than being closed outright. Closing as stale would be premature because the underlying capability (auto-filing bugs with tracebacks, à la ubuntu-bug) is still a plausible, unimplemented feature and there is no evidence it was implemented elsewhere or superseded.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":14.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":60,"confidence":70,"support_request":0},"age_days":3169,"labels":[],"created_at":"2018-01-08T14:03:30.946841+00:00","updated_at":"2018-09-03T08:00:59.963033+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":60,"support_request":0,"confidence":70,"impact":35,"quick_win":14.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29303,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1748324","title":"python plugin fails on hashes in requirements.txt","author":"~ipmb","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1748324","summary":"Python plugin (snapcraft 2.35) fails when requirements.txt contains --hash entries, as pip's --require-hashes mode rejects the file:// directory requirement. Old plugin architecture removed; issue is 8.5 years old with no maintainer activity.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The traceback references snapcraft 2.35 and snapcraft/plugins/python.py, but the current repo layout shows no plugins/ directory — the old plugin system was replaced by the parts-based architecture under snapcraft/parts/. The issue is 3126 days old with zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction, and the affected code path no longer exists.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":9.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"confidence":70,"support_request":25},"age_days":3138,"labels":[],"created_at":"2018-02-09T00:06:31.866736+00:00","updated_at":"2018-02-09T22:46:20.589206+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":40,"support_request":25,"confidence":70,"impact":15,"quick_win":9.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29125,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1668424","title":"binutils-related issues with classic snap installed on 14.04","author":"~webdrake","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1668424","summary":"ABI/binutils version mismatch: static library built in a snapcraft cleanbuild fails to link on Ubuntu 14.04 with 'unrecognized relocation'. Zero comments, no maintainer interaction; 14.04 is EOL and the current codebase has no binutils handling.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is ~9.5 years old with zero comments and no maintainer interaction, and it targets Ubuntu 14.04, which is long past EOL (April 2019) and no longer a supported snap base. The current craft-parts-based snapcraft codebase contains no binutils-related code or commits, and the reporter framed it as an esoteric question about whether snapcraft could do anything, so the original problem is no longer applicable to the project.","scores":{"impact":10,"quick_win":5.5,"staleness":95,"complexity":45,"confidence":82,"support_request":55},"age_days":3484,"labels":["binutils","library","linking","snap"],"created_at":"2017-02-27T22:23:19.727016+00:00","updated_at":"2017-03-01T21:32:45.981600+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":45,"support_request":55,"confidence":82,"impact":10,"quick_win":5.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29111,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1664716","title":"store error list is ugly","author":"~joetalbott","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1664716","summary":"Cosmetic bug: snapcraft push displays raw '__all__' key in store error list. 9.5 years old, zero comments, no maintainer interaction; codebase has been significantly reorganized since filing.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 3485 days (~9.5 years) old with zero comments and no maintainer interaction. The snapcraft codebase has undergone multiple major rewrites (1.x → 2.x → 3.x) since filing, making the specific error-formatting code path almost certainly no longer reproducible. While '__all__' still appears 11 times in the repo, the original ugly display is a legacy code path from a version no longer supported.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":12.0,"staleness":95,"complexity":20,"confidence":60,"support_request":10},"age_days":3497,"labels":["store"],"created_at":"2017-02-14T21:03:54.712380+00:00","updated_at":"2017-02-16T20:41:47.581088+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":95,"complexity":20,"support_request":10,"confidence":60,"impact":15,"quick_win":12.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":15507,"project_name":"craft-actions","source":"github","external_id":"5","title":"[Feature Request] Publish rock to Github's Container Registry","author":"gruyaume","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-actions/issues/5","summary":"Feature request for a rockcraft-publish-ghcr GitHub Action to push rock artifacts to ghcr.io. Acknowledged by a maintainer in Feb 2023 but deferred pending upstream rockcraft upload support; no action was ever created. Inactive for ~3.5 years.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The maintainer (cjdcordeiro) acknowledged the request on 2023-02-06 but explicitly deferred it, saying rockcraft 'should eventually have an upload operation' and pointing to existing marketplace actions (push-oci-archive-to-remote-registry, skopeo-copy-action) as alternatives. No action was created in the repo (layout shows only rockcraft-pack and rockcraft/setup), and there has been zero activity for ~3.5 years. The deferral was conditional on upstream rockcraft changes, and the project has clearly moved on without implementing this specific action.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":21.0,"staleness":92,"complexity":40,"confidence":72,"support_request":10},"age_days":1316,"labels":[],"created_at":"2023-02-04T15:04:20+00:00","updated_at":"2023-02-06T16:50:49+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":92,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":72,"impact":35,"quick_win":21.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":27907,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1654899","title":"snapcraft.yaml syntax docs missing ‘classic’ confinement mode","author":"~raof","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1654899","summary":"Docs gap: snapcraft-syntax.md listed only devmode/strict confinement, omitting classic. 9.6 years old, 0 comments, no maintainer response; the referenced doc file predates the current restructured docs/reference layout.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 3522 days old with zero comments and no maintainer interaction, and the specific file it cites (docs/snapcraft-syntax.md) belongs to the old documentation structure; the repo layout shows docs have since been fully restructured (docs/reference/ with 58 files, how-to/, explanation/), and classic confinement is a core snap feature covered in the current reference. Caveat: repo file reads were unavailable (no pinned SHA), so I could not directly confirm the old file was deleted or that the new docs mention classic.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":92,"complexity":10,"confidence":55,"support_request":10},"age_days":3534,"labels":["snap-docs"],"created_at":"2017-01-08T23:21:48.193794+00:00","updated_at":"2017-05-10T22:19:51.616045+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":92,"complexity":10,"support_request":10,"confidence":55,"impact":20,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29092,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1662034","title":"Adding \"icon\" filed in the snapcraft.yaml template to define a package icon","author":"~liu-xiao-guo","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1662034","summary":"Feature request to add an icon field to the snapcraft init template so developers know how to set a package icon for the Ubuntu Store. Filed ~9.5 years ago with no labels, no comments, and no maintainer interaction; request remains unaddressed.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 3494 days old with 0 comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction, and it predates the current snapcraft 8.x codebase by years — the template and workflow it references are from the pre-rewrite era and no longer exist in that form. The underlying request (a one-line template addition) is trivial to re-file if still desired, so closing as stale is appropriate rather than keeping a 9.5-year-old untriaged request open.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":92,"complexity":10,"confidence":65,"support_request":10},"age_days":3506,"labels":[],"created_at":"2017-02-06T00:24:10.539061+00:00","updated_at":"2017-02-06T08:49:09.268944+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":92,"complexity":10,"support_request":10,"confidence":65,"impact":20,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29345,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1767151","title":"Setting SNAPCRAFT_ENABLE_SENTRY= causes stacktrace (empty string value not truthy)","author":"~kalikiana","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1767151","summary":"Bug report from snapcraft 1.x era where setting SNAPCRAFT_ENABLE_SENTRY= (empty string) caused a ValueError in strtobool. The referenced code path (snapcraft/cli/_errors.py) no longer exists in the current codebase. 8+ years old, zero interaction.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue references snapcraft/cli/_errors.py line 76 using strtobool on SNAPCRAFT_ENABLE_SENTRY, but the current repo layout shows no snapcraft/cli/ directory — the old 1.x CLI architecture has been replaced by the craft-application based 7.x codebase. With 3049 days of inactivity, zero comments, and the affected code path removed, the issue is no longer applicable.","scores":{"impact":10,"quick_win":8.5,"staleness":92,"complexity":15,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":3061,"labels":[],"created_at":"2018-04-26T16:18:18.933122+00:00","updated_at":"2018-04-26T16:18:18.933122+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":92,"complexity":15,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":10,"quick_win":8.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":28120,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1886858","title":"nodejs plugin doesn't set npm path for custom node version","author":"~benfrancis","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1886858","summary":"Bug: snapcraft's nodejs plugin downloads a custom nodejs-version but still runs build commands with the default node, leaving npm out of PATH. Reporter supplied a PATH workaround. 6 years old, no labels, zero comments, no maintainer response; nodejs plugin since deprecated/removed.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 2245 days old with 0 comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction, and the reporter already documented a working PATH workaround (PATH=$PATH:$SNAPCRAFT_PART_SRC/../npm/bin). Beyond mere age, the nodejs plugin has been deprecated/removed from snapcraft in favor of the npm plugin, so the reported default-node behavior no longer applies to current versions.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":12.0,"staleness":92,"complexity":40,"confidence":60,"support_request":25},"age_days":2257,"labels":[],"created_at":"2020-07-08T18:07:47.765449+00:00","updated_at":"2021-07-13T05:24:39.266320+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":92,"complexity":40,"support_request":25,"confidence":60,"impact":20,"quick_win":12.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29143,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1674124","title":"trying to push with the wrong macaroon return non user-friendly error","author":"~elopio","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1674124","summary":"Snapcraft push with a macaroon attenuated to a different snap returns a raw 403 JSON blob instead of a user-friendly error. Opened by maintainer elopio ~9.4 years ago, zero comments, no labels beyond bitesize/store/ui, no recorded fix.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"No maintainer has ever responded, labelled, or assigned this (0 comments, 3452 days old), so it has never been triaged. The 'bitesize' label suggests it was once considered a small, well-scoped UX fix (map the store's macaroon-permission-required 403 to a friendly message), but there is no evidence it was ever implemented or that the raw-JSON push error path still exists in current snapcraft, so a human should verify before closing.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":22.5,"staleness":92,"complexity":25,"confidence":55,"support_request":10},"age_days":3464,"labels":["bitesize","store","ui"],"created_at":"2017-03-19T17:20:44.979851+00:00","updated_at":"2017-03-19T17:20:44.979851+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":92,"complexity":25,"support_request":10,"confidence":55,"impact":30,"quick_win":22.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29396,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1790004","title":"Snapcraft should warn if it produces a snap that the store will reject","author":"~ej-finneran","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1790004","summary":"Feature request for snapcraft to warn during/after build about store-rejection issues like unusual file modes. No maintainer activity in 8 years. The snapcraft lint command (PRs #4095, #4115) now provides pre-upload checks.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is dormant for ~8 years (2923 days, 0 comments, no labels) and the requested capability now exists: merged PRs canonical/snapcraft#4095 and #4115 added a 'snapcraft lint' command that inspects a built snap and reports warnings, and the current tree contains a snapcraft/linters/ package. Closing as implemented-elsewhere is appropriate, with a pointer to the lint command.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":16.5,"staleness":92,"complexity":45,"confidence":72,"support_request":10},"age_days":2935,"labels":[],"created_at":"2018-08-30T21:35:07.094081+00:00","updated_at":"2018-08-30T21:35:07.094081+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":92,"complexity":45,"support_request":10,"confidence":72,"impact":30,"quick_win":16.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":28384,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1913599","title":"remote-build always recovers, even when --recover is not specified","author":"~nymea","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1913599","summary":"Snapcraft remote-build recovers a previous build even without --recover, breaking automated builds. Open ~5.5 years with zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer engagement; the remote-build command has since been removed from snapcraft.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has had zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer response for ~5.5 years (last activity 2013 days ago), and the remote-build command it targets was deprecated in snapcraft 7.x and removed in 8.0, so the reported behavior can no longer occur. Confidence is moderate because repo inspection tools were unavailable (no pinned SHA), so the removal of remote-build rests on background knowledge rather than verified code.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":19.5,"staleness":92,"complexity":35,"confidence":55,"support_request":10},"age_days":2053,"labels":[],"created_at":"2021-01-28T14:24:22.309519+00:00","updated_at":"2021-02-25T13:26:56.297545+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":92,"complexity":35,"support_request":10,"confidence":55,"impact":30,"quick_win":19.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29310,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1750527","title":"dashboard does not validate text fields","author":"~chipaca","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1750527","summary":"Old dashboard.snapcraft.io accepted newlines and control characters in snap Title/Summary/Description, allowing VT100 escape sequences in 'snap find' output. No labels, no comments, no activity for ~6 years; the old dashboard has since been replaced.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"Zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction for ~6 years (last activity 2170 days ago), and the issue targets the old dashboard.snapcraft.io, which has been replaced by the new store dashboard with proper field validation, so the original problem is no longer reproducible there. The residual CLI-side concern (snap find rendering unquoted summaries) should be re-verified against the current dashboard before any work is done. Confidence is moderate because repo/code tools were unavailable to confirm the current dashboard's validation behavior.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":15.0,"staleness":92,"complexity":40,"confidence":55,"support_request":10},"age_days":3127,"labels":[],"created_at":"2018-02-20T09:49:53.619600+00:00","updated_at":"2020-09-21T18:23:10.842308+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":92,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":55,"impact":25,"quick_win":15.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29304,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1749010","title":"No good way for errors to show how to run the same command again","author":"~kyrofa","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1749010","summary":"Feature request: no generic way for snapcraft error messages to print the exact command that was run (e.g. argv[1:]) so users can retry. Click lacks a clean API for this and using raw argv is fragile. Unlabelled, 0 comments, ~8.5 years old.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no assignee, and zero comments — no sign a maintainer has categorised or prioritised it, so it defaults to needs_triage. It is a genuine feature/UX request (not a support question) about surfacing the invoked command in retry-style errors, referenced from PR #1906 discussion. I could not verify current state via tools (repo access failed), so I cannot confirm whether a generic command-echo mechanism now exists, which keeps confidence moderate.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":16.5,"staleness":92,"complexity":45,"confidence":55,"support_request":10},"age_days":3134,"labels":[],"created_at":"2018-02-12T21:15:04.187413+00:00","updated_at":"2018-02-13T11:14:58.657279+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":92,"complexity":45,"support_request":10,"confidence":55,"impact":30,"quick_win":16.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":28137,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1918998","title":"Crash when key in snap/keys is not ascii armored","author":"~racb","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1918998","summary":"Snapcraft crashes with a raw 'utf-8' decode error instead of a friendly message when a key file in snap/keys/ is binary (not ASCII-armored) for a package-repositories key-id. Untriaged, no labels or comments, ~5.5 years old.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has zero comments, no labels, and no assignee, with last activity 1992 days ago, so it was never assessed by a maintainer. The reporter frames it as a genuine robustness bug (\"Expected: a suitable error message. Actual: a crash\") with a clear repro and an easy workaround, so it is not a support question. I could not verify via tools whether the experimental package-repositories key-id code path still exists, so a maintainer should confirm current relevance before fixing or closing.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":18.75,"staleness":92,"complexity":25,"confidence":62,"support_request":30},"age_days":2010,"labels":[],"created_at":"2021-03-13T00:09:33.173307+00:00","updated_at":"2021-03-18T13:13:05.042539+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":92,"complexity":25,"support_request":30,"confidence":62,"impact":25,"quick_win":18.75,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29368,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1778701","title":"parse-info-all bool","author":"~apachelogger","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1778701","summary":"Feature request for a parse-info-all boolean key in snapcraft parts to auto-discover all AppStream metainfo files instead of requiring explicit file listing. Open 8+ years, zero comments, no maintainer interaction, only auto-applied 19.04 version labels.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has zero comments, no assignee, and no maintainer response in 8+ years. The only labels (19.04, 19.04-blue, 19.04-external) are auto-applied version markers, not triage categorisation. It is a valid feature request that was never assessed. Related issue #5278 (metainfo data not used by store) was closed as blocked on store backend, but this request about file discovery is a separate concern that may still be actionable.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":21.0,"staleness":92,"complexity":40,"confidence":72,"support_request":25},"age_days":3000,"labels":["19.04","19.04-blue","19.04-external"],"created_at":"2018-06-26T10:43:10.546322+00:00","updated_at":"2019-02-12T11:15:47.896802+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":92,"complexity":40,"support_request":25,"confidence":72,"impact":35,"quick_win":21.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":28986,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1622037","title":"snapcraft list-keys prints no message when there are no keys","author":"~elopio","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1622037","summary":"snapcraft list-keys prints only an empty table header when no keys are registered; a friendly message (and possibly tips on adding keys) is requested. Unlabelled, zero comments, no activity for ~10 years; a similar Launchpad bug remains open.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no assignee, and zero comments in ~10 years, showing no sign of maintainer triage. It cannot be closed as stale because a near-identical report (Launchpad #1736864) is still open, indicating the empty-table behavior was likely never fixed; a maintainer should confirm current behavior before deciding. Confidence is moderate because source inspection was unavailable (no pinned SHA) to verify whether the message was added in a later version.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":17.0,"staleness":92,"complexity":15,"confidence":65,"support_request":10},"age_days":3655,"labels":[],"created_at":"2016-09-09T22:49:45.756078+00:00","updated_at":"2016-10-25T22:50:34.059635+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":92,"complexity":15,"support_request":10,"confidence":65,"impact":20,"quick_win":17.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":28213,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1594374","title":"Use a user directory for temporary files","author":"~croepha","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1594374","summary":"Feature request from 2016 to make snapcraft build directories (parts, stage, prime) configurable with a default of ~/.snapcraft/. Zero comments, no labels, 10+ years inactive. Configurability has since been partially addressed via CRAFT_PARTS_DIR env var, but default location remains project directory.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"Issue is 3724 days old with zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction. The core request for configurable build directories has been addressed via the CRAFT_PARTS_DIR environment variable in modern snapcraft, making the original ask largely moot. Changing the default location to ~/.snapcraft/ would be a breaking change incompatible with the current architecture and existing user workflows.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":12.0,"staleness":92,"complexity":70,"confidence":65,"support_request":25},"age_days":3736,"labels":[],"created_at":"2016-06-20T13:31:21.195142+00:00","updated_at":"2017-03-04T19:37:38.137855+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":92,"complexity":70,"support_request":25,"confidence":65,"impact":40,"quick_win":12.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29500,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1814017","title":"Add docker image for core18 building","author":"~jbicha","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1814017","summary":"Request for a docker image with multipass preconfigured to build snaps on the core18 base, for gnome-calculator CI. No comments, no labels, inactive ~6.7 years; core18 is EOL and the project has moved on to newer bases.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction, with last activity 2434 days ago. It is also no longer applicable: core18 (Ubuntu 18.04) is past standard support and the project has since moved to newer bases, and the analogous request snapcraft#3384 to add core20 to the Dockerfiles was closed as superseded after maintainers declined base-specific images due to compatibility issues.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":9.0,"staleness":92,"complexity":40,"confidence":70,"support_request":50},"age_days":2782,"labels":[],"created_at":"2019-01-31T02:17:08.817665+00:00","updated_at":"2020-01-01T11:10:15.638790+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":92,"complexity":40,"support_request":50,"confidence":70,"impact":15,"quick_win":9.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29581,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1835158","title":"show build backend used on --debug","author":"~techtonik","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1835158","summary":"Feature request from the snapcraft 2.x era to log which VM/LXD build backend is used when running with --debug, to diagnose slow builds. No maintainer response; the old provider code has since been replaced by craft-providers in snapcraft 7.x.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 2617 days old with zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction, and it targets snapcraft 2.x provider code (the 'Launching a VM'/'Retrieving image' messages) that was completely replaced by craft-providers in the 7.x rewrite, so the affected version is no longer supported and the original problem is no longer reproducible there. Modern snapcraft --debug already surfaces detailed craft-providers/LXD instance logging, making the specific request moot. Confidence is moderate because repository tools failed to pin a SHA, so I could not directly confirm current debug output.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":17.0,"staleness":92,"complexity":15,"confidence":60,"support_request":25},"age_days":2629,"labels":[],"created_at":"2019-07-03T05:12:25.739351+00:00","updated_at":"2019-08-28T11:51:52.358102+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":92,"complexity":15,"support_request":25,"confidence":60,"impact":20,"quick_win":17.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":28388,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1917897","title":"Files created in override-stage fail to get copied to prime","author":"~racb","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1917897","summary":"Reporter's override-stage creates a symlink (usr/bin/awk) that is not copied into prime/, so it's missing from the snap. No maintainer response, no labels, 0 comments; ~5.5 years old. Likely a craft-parts fileset-tracking gap for scriptlet-created files.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"No labels, no assignee, and zero maintainer interaction in ~5.5 years, so it has never been triaged. The underlying mechanism is still present in craft-parts: _run_step returns empty StepContents when an override-stage scriptlet runs (part_handler.py:659-700), so scriptlet-created files are not tracked in StageState and may be dropped at prime — the same class of bug as canonical/craft-parts#1122 (override-prime). Whether it reproduces on a current snapcraft release is unverified, so a human should confirm before closing.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":92,"complexity":55,"confidence":55,"support_request":25},"age_days":2017,"labels":[],"created_at":"2021-03-05T14:39:37.329567+00:00","updated_at":"2021-03-11T14:34:45.792485+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":92,"complexity":55,"support_request":25,"confidence":55,"impact":40,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29185,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1697473","title":"FLTK applications cannot start","author":"~msweet","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1697473","summary":"2017 report that FLTK apps (rasterview, HTMLDOC) fail to start in snaps with XOpenIM and fontconfig errors. Zero comments, no labels, no maintainer activity for ~8.6 years; references the since-removed unity7 interface.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 9.2 years old (last activity 3142 days ago) with 0 comments, no labels, and no maintainer response. It references the unity7 interface, which has since been removed from snapd, and modern bases (core20+) ship fontconfig and fonts, so the reported XOpenIM/fontconfig errors are no longer reproducible in current environments. If the reporter still has trouble, they should file a fresh issue against a current base.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":9.0,"staleness":92,"complexity":40,"confidence":70,"support_request":65},"age_days":3379,"labels":[],"created_at":"2017-06-12T14:46:43.332218+00:00","updated_at":"2018-01-23T15:07:26.388025+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":92,"complexity":40,"support_request":65,"confidence":70,"impact":15,"quick_win":9.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29723,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1899311","title":"tarfile.ReadError: unexpected end of data","author":"~amodster","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1899311","summary":"snapcraft pull fails with tarfile.ReadError 'unexpected end of data' when extracting a local tar source. 5+ years old, snapcraft 2.43.1, zero comments, no maintainer interaction. Likely a truncated/corrupt tar file on the user's side, not a snapcraft defect.","suggested_action":"close_not_a_bug","suggested_action_reason":"The 'unexpected end of data' tarfile.ReadError is raised by Python's tarfile module when the archive file is truncated or corrupt — the tar header declares a member size larger than the remaining bytes in the file. This is a user data issue (the local file '../../dkentry-py3-dotnet.tar' is incomplete), not a snapcraft bug; snapcraft correctly surfaced the underlying error. The user's only 'reproduction' was importing the tarfile module, which is unrelated. The issue is also on a 2020-era version (2.43.1) with no reproduction steps, no maintainer response, and no activity in ~5 years.","scores":{"impact":10,"quick_win":8.0,"staleness":92,"complexity":20,"confidence":72,"support_request":75},"age_days":2163,"labels":["craft-418"],"created_at":"2020-10-11T02:46:56.908657+00:00","updated_at":"2021-07-30T20:13:45.268716+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":92,"complexity":20,"support_request":75,"confidence":72,"impact":10,"quick_win":8.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29032,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1638405","title":"libunity not added to LD_LIBRARY_PATH","author":"~zyga","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1638405","summary":"Snapcraft 2.20 wrapper script omits libunity from LD_LIBRARY_PATH on Launchpad buildd but not locally. No labels, no comments, no maintainer interaction in ~7.6 years. Current desktop extension explicitly adds libunity to LD_LIBRARY_PATH, making the original problem obsolete.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue targets snapcraft 2.20 (2016) and the wrapper script mechanism has been completely rewritten since then (command-chain, adapters, extensions). The current desktop extension at extensions/desktop/common/desktop-exports explicitly includes 'append_dir LD_LIBRARY_PATH \"$SNAP_DESKTOP_RUNTIME/usr/lib/$ARCH/libunity\"', directly addressing the libunity path concern. Zero maintainer interaction, no labels, and no activity in 2794 days confirm this is no longer applicable.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":14.0,"staleness":92,"complexity":30,"confidence":78,"support_request":10},"age_days":3602,"labels":[],"created_at":"2016-11-01T23:00:16.803270+00:00","updated_at":"2019-01-07T04:33:46.358838+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":92,"complexity":30,"support_request":10,"confidence":78,"impact":20,"quick_win":14.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":28147,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1943242","title":"snapcraft can't build while I'm also running virtual box","author":"~colin-king","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1943242","summary":"snapcraft build fails with a Multipass 'Another virtual machine manager is currently running' error when VirtualBox is active. Reporter self-identifies it as a fundamental multipass/hypervisor conflict. 5 years old, zero comments, no labels, no maintainer interaction.","suggested_action":"close_not_a_bug","suggested_action_reason":"The reporter's own conclusion — 'I guess this is a fundamental multipass issue' — points to a hypervisor-level conflict (two VMMs running at once) that snapcraft does not control, making this a support/usage question rather than a snapcraft bug. The resolution is to shut down VirtualBox or use a different multipass driver, i.e. working-as-intended behavior resolvable via configuration. With 1816 days of inactivity, no labels, and no maintainer response, there is no open snapcraft work to track.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":16.25,"staleness":92,"complexity":35,"confidence":78,"support_request":75},"age_days":1829,"labels":[],"created_at":"2021-09-10T09:12:43.007363+00:00","updated_at":"2021-09-10T09:32:28.217301+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":92,"complexity":35,"support_request":75,"confidence":78,"impact":25,"quick_win":16.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":28076,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1809852","title":"zipfile.BadZipFile: File is not a zip file raises an exception","author":"~timhirrel","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1809852","summary":"Snapcraft 2.43.1 crash during pull: zipfile.BadZipFile when a source file is not a valid zip. No maintainer interaction for ~7.5 years; the old internal/sources code path no longer exists in current snapcraft.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The traceback points to snapcraft/internal/sources/_zip.py in version 2.43.1 (Dec 2018), but the current repo layout has no internal/ directory at all — the lifecycle was rewritten around craft-parts, so the affected code path and version no longer exist. With 0 comments, no labels, and no maintainer activity in ~7.5 years, the issue is both inactive and no longer applicable to the current codebase; the underlying cause (user pointing source: at a non-zip file) would surface differently today.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":16.0,"staleness":92,"complexity":20,"confidence":70,"support_request":30},"age_days":2817,"labels":[],"created_at":"2018-12-27T02:38:17.096879+00:00","updated_at":"2019-03-10T11:16:49.370168+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":92,"complexity":20,"support_request":30,"confidence":70,"impact":20,"quick_win":16.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29619,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1851003","title":"Error message displays name of first application when a secondary application fails name validation","author":"~ec0","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1851003","summary":"Snapcraft schema validation names the first app instead of the actually invalid app when a secondary app name fails validation. Open ~6.8 years, no labels, zero maintainer interaction, no fix; a similar report (LP 1996525) is also open.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no assignee, and zero comments across 2495 days, so it has never been assessed by a maintainer; a well-formed bug report with a clear reproducer still needs triage. It cannot be closed as stale because there is no evidence the current (pydantic-based) validation no longer produces this misleading message, and a related open report (LP 1996525) shows the same symptom persisted into snapcraft 7.2.7. A maintainer should verify whether the error still misreports the app name in the current codebase before deciding to fix or close.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":12.0,"staleness":92,"complexity":40,"confidence":60,"support_request":10},"age_days":2507,"labels":[],"created_at":"2019-11-02T05:19:47.764394+00:00","updated_at":"2019-11-02T05:19:47.764394+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":92,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":60,"impact":20,"quick_win":12.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29163,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1684225","title":"retry store actions when it returns a 503 error","author":"~elopio","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1684225","summary":"Request to add retry with backoff to all snapcraft store commands when the store returns 503. Filed by maintainer elopio ~9.4 years ago, labeled 'store', no activity since. The store client has since been rewritten around the shared craft-store library.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 3421 days old with zero comments or maintainer interaction, and the store client it targets has since been replaced by the shared craft-store library (which introduced its own http_client module), so the original request no longer maps to the current architecture. If 503 retry is still missing, it should be requested against the current store stack rather than this long-dormant issue.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":22.0,"staleness":92,"complexity":45,"confidence":55,"support_request":5},"age_days":3433,"labels":["store"],"created_at":"2017-04-19T16:49:15.416973+00:00","updated_at":"2017-04-19T16:49:15.416973+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":92,"complexity":45,"support_request":5,"confidence":55,"impact":40,"quick_win":22.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29641,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1861026","title":"python3 ctypes can't find libs on due to ld cache","author":"~jdstrand","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1861026","summary":"python3-magic snap fails on Ubuntu Core 16/18 with 'undefined symbol: magic_open' via ctypes (ld cache); works on classic. No maintainer response; affected bases (core, core18) are EOL.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The report targets UC16/UC18 and 'base: core'/'core18', all of which are EOL, and cites snapcraft 3.9.7/3.9.8. It has zero comments and no maintainer interaction over ~6.6 years (2408 days old), so the specific problem is no longer applicable to currently supported base versions.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":16.5,"staleness":92,"complexity":45,"confidence":68,"support_request":15},"age_days":2420,"labels":[],"created_at":"2020-01-27T19:47:39.118489+00:00","updated_at":"2020-12-04T13:08:08.994762+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":92,"complexity":45,"support_request":15,"confidence":68,"impact":30,"quick_win":16.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29082,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1660302","title":"foreign architecture builds doesn't work with classic snaps","author":"~popey","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1660302","summary":"Cross-arch builds (--target-arch) of classic snaps fail because the build environment lacks the core snap. Reported 2016 against snapcraft 2.x; 0 comments, no maintainer response; codebase since fully rewritten.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 3500 days old with last activity 3238 days ago, 0 comments, and no maintainer interaction, and it targets snapcraft 2.x (2016) which has been entirely superseded by the current codebase (repo now shows a modern layout with extensions, linters, and spread tests). The affected version is no longer supported, and the reporter's mksquashfs workaround remains available, so it is no longer actionable as filed.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":16.5,"staleness":92,"complexity":45,"confidence":65,"support_request":10},"age_days":3512,"labels":["isv","kubernetes"],"created_at":"2017-01-30T11:30:11.945234+00:00","updated_at":"2017-10-19T14:10:20.099704+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":92,"complexity":45,"support_request":10,"confidence":65,"impact":30,"quick_win":16.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29600,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1846068","title":"Specifying `/var/lib` in layout breaks snapd because of `/var/lib/snapd`","author":"~zyga","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1846068","summary":"Snapcraft allows /var/lib as a layout target, which shadows /var/lib/snapd and produces an uninstallable snap. No validation rejects parent paths of disallowed layout targets. 7 years old, zero comments, no labels, no maintainer response.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction in ~7 years (2527 days), so it has never been triaged. The docs at docs/reference/layouts.rst still list /var/lib/snapd as a disallowed layout target, confirming the constraint is current, but there is no evidence that snapcraft added validation to reject ancestor paths like /var/lib. A maintainer should verify whether this validation gap still exists in the current codebase before deciding to fix or close.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":17.5,"staleness":92,"complexity":30,"confidence":72,"support_request":10},"age_days":2539,"labels":[],"created_at":"2019-09-30T20:05:57.493387+00:00","updated_at":"2019-10-03T20:39:15.779766+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":92,"complexity":30,"support_request":10,"confidence":72,"impact":25,"quick_win":17.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":16033,"project_name":"starbase","source":"github","external_id":"211","title":"Merge queues","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/starbase/issues/211","summary":"Tracking issue for adopting GitHub merge queues, created by maintainer lengau 845 days ago referencing charmcraft PR #1676. No comments, no follow-up documentation, and no merge queue configuration found in the starbase repo.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is a maintainer-created tracking issue from 845 days ago with zero comments and no activity. The author stated they would document the merge queue configuration here once comfortable with it, but no such documentation was ever added. No merge queue configuration exists in the starbase repo, and the referenced implementation (charmcraft#1676) is in a different repository. The tracking purpose has been abandoned with no indication of ongoing work.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":17.0,"staleness":92,"complexity":15,"confidence":78,"support_request":5},"age_days":857,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-05-08T18:08:53+00:00","updated_at":"2024-05-08T18:08:53+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":92,"complexity":15,"support_request":5,"confidence":78,"impact":20,"quick_win":17.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":28968,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1617302","title":"Specifying a nonexistent plug does cause any errors","author":"~mattyw","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1617302","summary":"Feature request from 2016: snapcraft should error or warn when a nonexistent plug name is specified in snapcraft.yaml (e.g. misspelling network-bind). No labels, no comments, no maintainer interaction in 10 years.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer response in 10 years (last activity 2260 days ago). It is a legitimate feature request for build-time validation of plug names against known snap interfaces, but it cannot be closed as stale without confirming whether current snapcraft already validates plug names or whether the approach has changed. A maintainer needs to assess current relevance before any action.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":19.25,"staleness":92,"complexity":45,"confidence":45,"support_request":35},"age_days":3669,"labels":[],"created_at":"2016-08-26T12:40:37.108363+00:00","updated_at":"2020-06-23T11:19:26.173916+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":92,"complexity":45,"support_request":35,"confidence":45,"impact":35,"quick_win":19.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":28998,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1626632","title":"snapcraft part sources are not verified for authenticity","author":"~cmiller","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1626632","summary":"Feature request to add GPG signature verification for snapcraft part sources (source-signer-keys). Open ~10 years with 0 comments, no labels, no maintainer interaction; feature never implemented in current codebase.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, 0 comments, and no maintainer response in ~10 years, so it has never been triaged. However, close_stale is not justified: I confirmed via grep and commit search that source-signer-keys/source_signature do not exist in the current codebase, so the feature was never implemented and the underlying supply-chain gap still applies. A maintainer needs to decide whether to close it as an outdated proposal or keep it as a wishlist item.","scores":{"impact":55,"quick_win":15.4,"staleness":92,"complexity":72,"confidence":70,"support_request":5},"age_days":3642,"labels":[],"created_at":"2016-09-22T16:02:24.721652+00:00","updated_at":"2018-08-26T08:47:38.850604+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":92,"complexity":72,"support_request":5,"confidence":70,"impact":55,"quick_win":15.4,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29438,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1802327","title":"cannot use build snaps that are marked private in the store","author":"~apachelogger","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1802327","summary":"Snapcraft cannot use a build-snap that is marked private in the store: it reports the snap as not available on the channel even though snap install succeeds. No maintainer activity for ~6 years; still open.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has zero comments, no labels beyond canonical-bootstack, and no maintainer interaction in ~6 years (last activity 2180 days ago), so it has never been triaged. It is a genuine bug (private build-snap reported as unavailable despite snap install working), not a support question, but I could not confirm via tools whether it was fixed in a newer snapcraft version, so I cannot justify closing it as stale/irrelevant without evidence.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":92,"complexity":60,"confidence":55,"support_request":10},"age_days":2865,"labels":["canonical-bootstack"],"created_at":"2018-11-08T15:44:29.052930+00:00","updated_at":"2020-09-11T08:35:11.083571+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":92,"complexity":60,"support_request":10,"confidence":55,"impact":45,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29652,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1862666","title":"musl libc support","author":"~cjp256","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1862666","summary":"Maintainer-filed design note that snapcraft's gnu arch triplets and soname crawling don't handle musl libc (x86_64-linux-musl), causing unsatisfiable libc.musl-x86_64.so.1 errors; a layout workaround exists. No labels, comments, or activity in ~6.5 years.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no assignee, and zero comments in 2394 days, showing no triage or prioritisation despite being filed by a maintainer. It is an open-ended design question ('we should sort out the appropriate way to handle this case. There may be other gotchas') rather than a concrete bug, and I could not verify via repo inspection whether musl handling was later added, so a human should decide if it is still in scope. The body's layout workaround means it is not blocking for users, but there is no evidence it is obsolete, so closing is not justified.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":8.75,"staleness":92,"complexity":75,"confidence":55,"support_request":10},"age_days":2406,"labels":[],"created_at":"2020-02-10T16:40:42.229458+00:00","updated_at":"2020-02-10T16:40:42.229458+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":92,"complexity":75,"support_request":10,"confidence":55,"impact":35,"quick_win":8.75,"has_related_links":false},{"id":28784,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1839842","title":"Dump plugin to fetch single binary","author":"~doismellburning","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1839842","summary":"Wishlist request for an http/binary source-type on the dump plugin to fetch a single uncompressed binary without unpacking. 7 years old with no maintainer response; likely already addressable via the parts library's file source type.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is ~7 years old (2576 days) with zero comments and no maintainer engagement, and the requested capability (fetch a single file without unpacking) is now provided by the parts library's `file` source type, which the dump plugin uses for its `source` handling — making the original request moot. The reporter's own override-pull workaround also remains available.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":21.0,"staleness":92,"complexity":40,"confidence":60,"support_request":15},"age_days":2588,"labels":["wishlist"],"created_at":"2019-08-12T13:24:40.360022+00:00","updated_at":"2019-08-14T13:15:12.847414+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":92,"complexity":40,"support_request":15,"confidence":60,"impact":35,"quick_win":21.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29796,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1965814","title":"snap contains python 3.8 and 3.9 libs","author":"~kenneth-loafman","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1965814","summary":"Snapcraft 2.x-era report that a built snap bundles both python3.8 and python3.9, causing librsync to fail on the 3.9 interpreter. Unlabelled, zero comments, inactive ~4.4 years; the python plugin was since rewritten to a venv-based design in Snapcraft 3.x.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The report is from the Snapcraft 2.x era (1624 days old, 0 comments, no labels/assignee) and describes the old stage-packages-based python plugin bundling the build environment's system python alongside the base's. The current codebase's PythonPlugin (snapcraft/parts/plugins/python_plugin.py) subclasses craft_parts' venv-based python_plugin and no longer stages a system interpreter, so the two-conflicting-system-pythons symptom is no longer reproducible on a supported base. Inactivity alone is not the basis; the specific mechanism has been replaced.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":15.75,"staleness":92,"complexity":55,"confidence":62,"support_request":25},"age_days":1636,"labels":[],"created_at":"2022-03-21T19:18:39.611971+00:00","updated_at":"2022-03-24T14:35:31.381975+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":92,"complexity":55,"support_request":25,"confidence":62,"impact":35,"quick_win":15.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29593,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1841292","title":"psuh should support wildcards","author":"~popey","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1841292","summary":"Wishlist feature request for snapcraft push to accept multiple snap files or a wildcard so several architectures can be pushed and released to a channel in one command. Open ~7 years with no maintainer activity or comments.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"This is a low-impact convenience wishlist item (labeled 'wishlist') from ~7 years ago with zero maintainer engagement and no comments. The reporter can already achieve the same result with a trivial shell loop (for f in *.snap; do snapcraft push \"$f\" --release edge; done), so the added value is minimal and it has long sat unaddressed.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":17.5,"staleness":92,"complexity":30,"confidence":55,"support_request":40},"age_days":2577,"labels":["wishlist"],"created_at":"2019-08-24T04:33:39.863418+00:00","updated_at":"2019-08-26T14:08:12.903232+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":92,"complexity":30,"support_request":40,"confidence":55,"impact":25,"quick_win":17.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29030,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1637625","title":"snapcraft create-key doesn't require login, but snapcraft list-keys does","author":"~elopio","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1637625","summary":"CLI inconsistency: create-key works without login but list-keys fails with credential errors. Issue is 9.8 years old with zero comments. The list-keys command has since been removed and replaced by the keys command, which still requires login.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The specific command referenced (list-keys) has been removed and replaced by the keys command (commit 30c9fcd19, PR #6144), making the reproduction steps in the issue no longer valid. The issue is 3594 days old with zero comments or maintainer interaction. While the underlying login requirement persists in the keys command, the issue as written no longer applies to the current CLI surface.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":11.25,"staleness":92,"complexity":25,"confidence":78,"support_request":5},"age_days":3606,"labels":["store"],"created_at":"2016-10-28T19:39:36.872156+00:00","updated_at":"2016-10-28T19:39:36.872156+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":92,"complexity":25,"support_request":5,"confidence":78,"impact":15,"quick_win":11.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":28394,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1948464","title":"Please add support for advanced grammar in organize","author":"~xnox","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1948464","summary":"Feature request to allow advanced grammar (try:/on $arch) in the organize part property, so arch-specific file mappings can be declared instead of using override-build. No maintainer response or labels; open ~5 years.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The request is a legitimate feature gap (grammar support for the organize mapping, which currently only accepts a plain dict), but it has zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction in ~5 years, so it has never been assessed. It is not stale-closable on inactivity alone since the workaround (override-build) still exists and the feature may still be wanted; it needs a maintainer to decide whether grammar should be applied to organize keys/values in craft-parts/snapcraft.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":15.75,"staleness":92,"complexity":55,"confidence":55,"support_request":15},"age_days":1786,"labels":[],"created_at":"2021-10-22T14:10:50.185539+00:00","updated_at":"2021-11-23T14:32:17.232124+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":92,"complexity":55,"support_request":15,"confidence":55,"impact":35,"quick_win":15.75,"has_related_links":false},{"id":28123,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1893262","title":"pygtk apps fail with gnome-3-34 extension","author":"~ken-vandine","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1893262","summary":"pygtk apps segfault with gnome-3-34 extension due to python interpreter incompatibility; PATH/PYTHONPATH workaround provided. No maintainer activity in 3.6 years; gnome-3-34-1804 targets EOL Ubuntu 18.04.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 2195 days old with zero comments and no labels, and last activity was 1320 days ago. It targets the gnome-3-34-1804 content snap, which is built for Ubuntu 18.04 — a platform that has been EOL for years. The gnome-3-34 extension has long since been superseded by newer GNOME extensions (gnome-42, gnome-46, etc.), making the reported incompatibility no longer applicable to current snapcraft versions. A workaround is already documented in the issue body.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":8.25,"staleness":92,"complexity":45,"confidence":72,"support_request":35},"age_days":2207,"labels":[],"created_at":"2020-08-27T19:00:54.702781+00:00","updated_at":"2023-01-20T03:45:08.635449+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":92,"complexity":45,"support_request":35,"confidence":72,"impact":15,"quick_win":8.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":28773,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1814066","title":"Add a method of listing the keys on a store","author":"~jamesj","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1814066","summary":"Feature request for a --remote flag on snapcraft list-keys to query registered keys from the snap store. Open 7.5 years, no maintainer interaction, project has moved issue tracking to Launchpad where a corresponding bug (1814066) is open.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The project has explicitly abandoned GitHub issue tracking in favor of Launchpad (issue #100: 'Issues are tracked on launchpad... GitHub issue tracking has been abandoned for this project'), and the corresponding Launchpad bug 1814066 is open and serves as the canonical tracker. The issue is 7.5 years old with zero comments and no activity for over 4 years, making this GitHub issue a stale duplicate of the Launchpad bug.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":19.5,"staleness":92,"complexity":35,"confidence":72,"support_request":10},"age_days":2781,"labels":["account-key","feature"],"created_at":"2019-01-31T10:21:51.074998+00:00","updated_at":"2022-05-24T22:00:11.953558+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":92,"complexity":35,"support_request":10,"confidence":72,"impact":30,"quick_win":19.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29557,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1828252","title":"i386 arch not enabled on amd64 build systems","author":"~popey","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1828252","summary":"Feature request to enable i386 architecture on amd64 build systems so snaps requiring i386 build/stage packages can be built. Filed 7+ years ago with zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction. The suggested mechanism (dpkg --add-architecture during VM/container stand-up) references a build system era that has since changed significantly.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 2672 days (~7.3 years) old with zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer engagement. The specific suggestion to run 'dpkg --add-architecture i386 && apt update' during 'VM / container stand-up' references a build system architecture that has evolved substantially since filing (snapcraft has moved through multiple major base revisions and build-environment redesigns). Without evidence the underlying problem persists in the current build system, and given the extreme age and complete lack of interaction, the issue is no longer actionable in its current form.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":22.75,"staleness":92,"complexity":35,"confidence":50,"support_request":25},"age_days":2684,"labels":[],"created_at":"2019-05-08T15:16:39.627534+00:00","updated_at":"2019-05-08T15:16:39.627534+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":92,"complexity":35,"support_request":25,"confidence":50,"impact":35,"quick_win":22.75,"has_related_links":false},{"id":28914,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1599234","title":"should not remove suid/guid from binaries when confinement is devmode","author":"~osomon","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1599234","summary":"Snapcraft strips SUID/SGID bits during pack, breaking oxide chrome-sandbox in devmode. Request to preserve bits when confinement is devmode. Open 10 years, no labels, no comments, never triaged.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no maintainer comments, and no assignee after 10 years, indicating it was never triaged. The underlying behavior (snapcraft stripping SUID/SGID bits) is still a real snapcraft behavior, and the feature request to conditionally preserve bits in devmode remains potentially valid, so it needs assessment before any close decision.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":19.25,"staleness":92,"complexity":45,"confidence":55,"support_request":25},"age_days":3721,"labels":[],"created_at":"2016-07-05T16:48:16.765465+00:00","updated_at":"2016-12-19T15:43:19.673548+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":92,"complexity":45,"support_request":25,"confidence":55,"impact":35,"quick_win":19.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":5037,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"638","title":"Client.Timeout exceeded while awaiting headers","author":"abhigyanghosh30","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/638","summary":"Network timeout (Client.Timeout) when LXD container installs snapd during rockcraft pack, hitting api.snapcraft.io. 776 days old, 0 comments, no labels, no maintainer response. Transient network error on rockcraft 1.5.3.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The error is a transient network timeout (Client.Timeout exceeded while awaiting headers on POST to api.snapcraft.io/v2/snaps/refresh) occurring inside the LXD container during snapd installation — an environmental/network issue, not a rockcraft code defect. The issue is 776 days old with zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction, and the reporter was on rockcraft 1.5.3 (revision 2218), a version no longer current. A similar LXD network timeout in snapcraft#4443 was attributed to container network configuration (Docker/VPN), confirming this is not a reproducible product bug.","scores":{"impact":10,"quick_win":8.0,"staleness":92,"complexity":20,"confidence":78,"support_request":75},"age_days":789,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-07-16T07:22:52+00:00","updated_at":"2024-07-16T07:22:52+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":92,"complexity":20,"support_request":75,"confidence":78,"impact":10,"quick_win":8.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29656,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1864589","title":"“ModuleNotFoundError: No module named ‘distutils.util’” when trying to build snaps on Launchpad (but works locally)","author":"~pieq","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1864589","summary":"Snapcraft Launchpad builds fail with 'No module named distutils.util' due to stage-directory caching of python3 deps; workaround (add python3-distutils to stage-packages) documented in body. Untriaged, no comments, inactive ~5 years.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is ~6.5 years old with zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer engagement, and the specific failure mode depends on the python3-distutils package, which was removed from Python 3.12 (PEP 632) and modern Ubuntu bases, so the original error is no longer reproducible on supported versions. The body already documents a working workaround (adding python3-distutils to stage-packages), and the old parts/staging system involved has since been rewritten. Confidence is moderate because code inspection was unavailable (no pinned SHA) to confirm whether the underlying stage-caching behavior was independently fixed.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":13.5,"staleness":92,"complexity":55,"confidence":65,"support_request":10},"age_days":2392,"labels":[],"created_at":"2020-02-25T03:57:42.368447+00:00","updated_at":"2021-08-12T15:32:09.182690+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":92,"complexity":55,"support_request":10,"confidence":65,"impact":30,"quick_win":13.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29781,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1955887","title":"snapcraft npm doesn't respect npm-node-version","author":"~nanu","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1955887","summary":"npm part ignores npm-node-version: build runs Node v10.19.0 instead of requested 14.13.0, breaking a vue-cli build. No maintainer activity or comments in ~4.7 years; npm part since moved to craft-parts where the property is supported.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 1708 days old with 0 comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction, and it targets the core18/core20-era npm part that has since been moved to the craft-parts library, where npm-node-version is a documented, supported property — so the original problem is no longer reproducible in current versions. Confidence is reduced because repository tooling failed (no pinned SHA) and I could not confirm the current npm part implementation in code.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":21.0,"staleness":92,"complexity":40,"confidence":45,"support_request":15},"age_days":1720,"labels":["snapcraft"],"created_at":"2021-12-28T08:36:53.201262+00:00","updated_at":"2021-12-28T08:42:49.110710+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":92,"complexity":40,"support_request":15,"confidence":45,"impact":35,"quick_win":21.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":27576,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1753965","title":"Error installing Python packages fails with trace","author":"~kalikiana","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1753965","summary":"Python plugin pip install failures (PyPI miss, VCS clone fail, HTTP 404) abort snapcraft with raw pip output plus a long traceback instead of a clean error. 8.5 years old, zero comments, references removed code path snapcraft/plugins/_python/_pip.py.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 8.5 years old with zero maintainer interaction and references snapcraft/plugins/_python/_pip.py, a file from the pre-3.0 plugin architecture that no longer exists in the codebase (current layout shows snapcraft/parts/ with no snapcraft/plugins/ directory). The old plugin system was fully replaced by the parts-based architecture, making the reported code path no longer applicable.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":16.25,"staleness":92,"complexity":35,"confidence":68,"support_request":10},"age_days":3112,"labels":["stacktrace"],"created_at":"2018-03-07T09:37:10.099806+00:00","updated_at":"2018-04-09T14:49:59.012016+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":92,"complexity":35,"support_request":10,"confidence":68,"impact":25,"quick_win":16.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29540,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1825792","title":"Support `no-install` build attribute in cmake plugin","author":"~brlin","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1825792","summary":"Feature request to add a no-install build attribute to the cmake plugin so projects lacking an install target need not re-implement the build step. Untriaged, no maintainer response in ~7 years; the plugin still unconditionally runs the install target.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no comments, and no assignee, showing no maintainer has ever assessed it, so it defaults to needs_triage. It is a valid feature request that remains unimplemented: craft_parts/plugins/cmake_plugin.py still unconditionally appends 'cmake --build . --target install' in get_build_commands, so a no-install attribute does not exist. It is not closed as stale because the requested capability is still missing and applicable, not merely old.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":16.25,"staleness":92,"complexity":35,"confidence":65,"support_request":15},"age_days":2701,"labels":[],"created_at":"2019-04-22T07:38:52.322769+00:00","updated_at":"2019-04-22T07:38:52.322769+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":92,"complexity":35,"support_request":15,"confidence":65,"impact":25,"quick_win":16.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":4833,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"842","title":"chore: refactor test to uniform sed commands","author":"yanksyoon","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/pull/842","summary":"Refactors spread test task.yaml files to use uniform sed commands. 526 days old, zero comments, zero reviewers, CLA unsigned, target files modified by multiple subsequent PRs since submission.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The PR is 526 days old with zero maintainer engagement (0 comments, 0 reviewers) and the CLA check is failing. The four target test files have since been modified by multiple merged PRs (#1097, #1194, #1279), and the sed commands in the current codebase are already fairly uniform, making this specific diff outdated and likely conflicting.","scores":{"impact":5,"quick_win":4.25,"staleness":92,"complexity":15,"confidence":72},"age_days":539,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-03-23T06:16:03+00:00","updated_at":"2025-04-08T03:21:19+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":92,"complexity":15,"support_request":null,"confidence":72,"impact":5,"quick_win":4.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":28134,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1917919","title":"snapcraft validate (and possibly other operations requiring gpg passphrases) fail on remote/headless systems","author":"~roadmr","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1917919","summary":"snapcraft validate fails on headless/remote systems because gpg cannot prompt for the key passphrase; workaround is unlocking the key outside snapcraft first. Reported on snapcraft 4.5.4/Ubuntu 18.04; no maintainer response in 4+ years, no labels.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has had zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction for over 4 years (last activity 1558 days ago), and the reproduction is pinned to snapcraft 4.5.4 on Ubuntu 18.04 (bionic), both of which are long past end of life. The root cause is external gpg-agent/pinentry behavior on headless systems, not a snapcraft regression, and there is no evidence the problem persists in current snapcraft 8.x. If it still reproduces on a supported version, a fresh report can be filed.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":92,"complexity":55,"confidence":60,"support_request":10},"age_days":2017,"labels":[],"created_at":"2021-03-05T17:19:17.216828+00:00","updated_at":"2022-05-26T07:50:53.194123+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":92,"complexity":55,"support_request":10,"confidence":60,"impact":40,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":28910,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1597603","title":"x- plugin convention is confusing","author":"~niemeyer","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1597603","summary":"Reports that the x- prefix on local plugin files (x-foo.py) is confusing: the plugin loads as 'foo' and the prefix doesn't disambiguate from remote plugins. No maintainer response in 10 years. The x- convention no longer exists in modern snapcraft.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 3715 days old with 0 comments and no maintainer interaction, and it targets snapcraft 1.x behavior: the x- prefix convention for local plugins was removed in snapcraft 2.x, where local plugins are placed in snap/local/plugins/ and referenced by plain name, so the reported shadowing concern no longer applies. The related Launchpad bug #1500873 was also closed as superseded by the updated specification. Confidence is moderate because repo code inspection was unavailable (no pinned SHA) to directly confirm the current plugin-loading code.","scores":{"impact":10,"quick_win":6.5,"staleness":92,"complexity":35,"confidence":65,"support_request":20},"age_days":3727,"labels":["custom-plugin"],"created_at":"2016-06-30T04:55:20.815947+00:00","updated_at":"2017-03-04T19:25:50.529353+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":92,"complexity":35,"support_request":20,"confidence":65,"impact":10,"quick_win":6.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":28102,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1852746","title":"Adding stage packages results in rebuilding the corresponding part","author":"~osomon","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1852746","summary":"Reported ~6.8 years ago: adding stage-packages to a part triggers a full rebuild of the part (150 rust crates) even though no build-packages changed. No maintainer response, no labels, 0 comments. Likely a craft-parts state-tracking design question.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction in ~6.8 years, so it has never been triaged. The reporter is asking whether the rebuild behavior is intentional or a bug, which requires a maintainer to assess whether craft-parts' state tracking should treat stage-packages changes as build-affecting. A related craft-parts commit (4cbc6006 'fix: use partitions for stage-packages tracking') and issue #4806 (build part action forces clean build, fixed via craft-parts PR #727) suggest the state-tracking area has been actively worked on since, but no direct fix for this specific scenario was found.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":13.5,"staleness":92,"complexity":55,"confidence":55,"support_request":40},"age_days":2493,"labels":[],"created_at":"2019-11-15T13:08:07.055518+00:00","updated_at":"2019-11-26T20:19:00.745197+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":92,"complexity":55,"support_request":40,"confidence":55,"impact":30,"quick_win":13.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":27988,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1718245","title":"svn source-type not honoring proxies","author":"~kwmonroe","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1718245","summary":"svn source-type fails on Launchpad builders behind an authenticated proxy because the svn handler doesn't write proxy settings to ~/.subversion/servers. Unlabelled, zero comments, no maintainer activity for ~9 years; reporter worked around it with a git mirror.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no assignee, and zero comments — no maintainer has ever acknowledged, categorised, or responded to it, so it has never been triaged. It is very old (last activity 3147 days ago), but I found no evidence the svn source type was removed or proxy support added, so close_stale isn't justified; a maintainer should confirm whether svn source still exists and whether the proposed ~/.subversion/servers fix is still applicable.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":15.0,"staleness":92,"complexity":25,"confidence":60,"support_request":10},"age_days":3280,"labels":[],"created_at":"2017-09-19T16:29:02.528523+00:00","updated_at":"2018-01-18T12:40:30.262033+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":92,"complexity":25,"support_request":10,"confidence":60,"impact":20,"quick_win":15.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":28335,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1727435","title":"error message for desktop file problems does not include how to fix them","author":"~elopio","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1727435","summary":"Snapcraft raises the same generic exception for all desktop file errors (missing file, missing 'Desktop Entry', missing 'Exec' key) without explaining how to fix each. Suggests splitting the exception or adding a fix-hint field. Open since 2018, no comments, no maintainer response, unlabelled beyond bitesize/ui.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"No maintainer has ever responded, labelled, or assigned this issue (0 comments, last activity 3170 days ago), so it has not been triaged. It is a real, well-scoped UX improvement (bitesize) to desktop-file error messages, not a support request, but there is no evidence it was ever assessed or that the underlying code path still behaves as described, so a human should confirm before closing or prioritizing.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":22.5,"staleness":92,"complexity":25,"confidence":55,"support_request":5},"age_days":3244,"labels":["bitesize","ui"],"created_at":"2017-10-25T16:43:55.975376+00:00","updated_at":"2017-12-27T04:56:17.408526+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":92,"complexity":25,"support_request":5,"confidence":55,"impact":30,"quick_win":22.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29815,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1979269","title":"core22 build just hangs if lxd has no network connectivity","author":"~peterpall","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1979269","summary":"Snapcraft core22 build hangs indefinitely at 'launching instance' when LXD has no network connectivity; reporter asks for better error feedback. Open ~4.2 years with no labels, comments, or maintainer interaction.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has had zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction for 1533 days, and the same hang symptom (waiting on LXD container networking) was triaged in canonical/snapcraft#4443 where a maintainer identified the root cause and linked an infinite-loop fix in snapcraft 7.5.4, indicating the underlying hang behavior was addressed in later releases. The original core22-era report is therefore likely no longer reproducible on current versions, though I could not verify the code directly (repo pinned SHA unavailable), which limits confidence.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":92,"complexity":40,"confidence":55,"support_request":45},"age_days":1545,"labels":[],"created_at":"2022-06-21T05:40:02.975843+00:00","updated_at":"2022-06-21T05:40:02.975843+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":92,"complexity":40,"support_request":45,"confidence":55,"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29603,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1846705","title":"Snapd 2.41 classic confinement GLIBC 2.25 not found","author":"~maciek-borzecki","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1846705","summary":"GLIBC_2.25 not found error when running classic confinement snaps (vscode, slack) on Manjaro/Xubuntu 19.04 with snapd 2.41. No maintainer response, 0 comments, references obsolete snapd and OS versions.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 2523 days old with last activity 1744 days ago, zero comments, and no maintainer engagement. It references snapd 2.41 (circa 2018) and Xubuntu 19.04 (EOL October 2020), both long obsolete. The specific GLIBC_2.25 mismatch with that core snap version is almost certainly resolved in modern core20/core22 bases, making the report no longer applicable.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":15.75,"staleness":92,"complexity":65,"confidence":65,"support_request":25},"age_days":2535,"labels":["classic","confinement","glibc"],"created_at":"2019-10-04T10:14:09.878845+00:00","updated_at":"2021-11-22T07:02:38.592943+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":92,"complexity":65,"support_request":25,"confidence":65,"impact":45,"quick_win":15.75,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29727,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1904212","title":"ValueError: No revision information for 1","author":"~popey","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1904212","summary":"snapcraft 4.4.1 'push' (deprecated) crashed with 'ValueError: No revision information for 1' after a successful upload/release, likely a store channel-map race. Open ~5.8 years, zero comments, no labels or maintainer response.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is from snapcraft 4.4.1 (~2019) using the long-deprecated 'push' command (the output itself notes it was replaced by 'upload'), has had zero comments or maintainer interaction for 1615+ days, and the affected version is far beyond support. The upload actually succeeded ('Revision 1 of dog created'), so the failure was a post-upload channel-map lookup error that is unlikely to reproduce on current snapcraft; if the reporter can reproduce on a supported version it can be reopened.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":13.75,"staleness":92,"complexity":45,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":2129,"labels":[],"created_at":"2020-11-13T14:57:10.117876+00:00","updated_at":"2022-03-30T19:39:44.030278+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":92,"complexity":45,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":25,"quick_win":13.75,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29994,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"2059787","title":"inaccurate error output in snapcraft release if given invalid revision","author":"~cderici","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2059787","summary":"Bug report: snapcraft release shows misleading 'No such command release' error when given an invalid revision. Untriaged, 888 days old with no maintainer interaction.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no maintainer comments, and no assignee after 888 days, indicating it has never been triaged. The bug report about a misleading error message when running `snapcraft release` with an invalid revision appears valid but requires maintainer assessment to confirm whether the issue still exists in the current codebase.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":33.75,"staleness":92,"complexity":25,"confidence":30,"support_request":15},"age_days":897,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-03-29T14:43:45.871970+00:00","updated_at":"2024-03-29T14:43:45.871970+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":92,"complexity":25,"support_request":15,"confidence":30,"impact":45,"quick_win":33.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29180,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1695244","title":"When closing the only channel that has a revision, an empty table is printed","author":"~elopio","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1695244","summary":"snapcraft close prints an empty revision table when closing the only channel that has a revision. Open since 2016 with zero comments and no maintainer interaction; a cosmetic store/UI bug from the snapcraft 1.x era.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 3377 days old with 0 comments and, per the related-issue record, 'unaddressed for over 9 years with no maintainer interaction.' It targets the snapcraft 1.x store command from October 2016, a version long superseded by the rewritten 2.x/3.x store commands, so the original behavior is almost certainly no longer reproducible. It is a trivial cosmetic fix (skip printing the table when there are no rows) with no remaining value in keeping it open.","scores":{"impact":10,"quick_win":8.5,"staleness":92,"complexity":15,"confidence":65,"support_request":10},"age_days":3389,"labels":["store","ui"],"created_at":"2017-06-02T10:15:06.548346+00:00","updated_at":"2017-09-08T23:27:40.375377+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":92,"complexity":15,"support_request":10,"confidence":65,"impact":10,"quick_win":8.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":28461,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1566331","title":"snapcraft autotools plugin doesn't support building other architectures","author":"~cmiller","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1566331","summary":"Feature request for the autotools plugin to support cross-compilation for other architectures via environment variables. Implemented by merged PR #1383 (CC/CXX env vars) and refined by #1654 (--host triplet). No maintainer interaction; ready to close.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The requested capability was implemented long ago: merged PR #1383 'autotools: Enable cross-compilation support' set CC/CXX env vars exactly as the issue asked, and merged PR #1654 later replaced that with proper --host triplet arguments including cross-strip toolchain detection. With 0 comments, no maintainer interaction, and last activity ~9.5 years ago, the issue is no longer applicable and can be closed as implemented.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":12.0,"staleness":92,"complexity":40,"confidence":85,"support_request":10},"age_days":3812,"labels":["plugin"],"created_at":"2016-04-05T14:02:58.823250+00:00","updated_at":"2017-03-04T19:17:08.344017+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":92,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":85,"impact":20,"quick_win":12.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":28803,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1918969","title":"No support for unsigned package-repositories","author":"~racb","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1918969","summary":"Feature request: snapcraft package-repositories requires a key-id/key even for local file:/// apt repos; reporter wants a trusted=yes passthrough or to drop the mandatory key. Open since ~2021, zero comments, no labels, no maintainer response.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is ~5.5 years old with zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction, but it is a legitimate feature request (expose apt's trusted=yes or make key-id optional for file:/// repos) rather than stale-and-irrelevant, so it should be triaged by a maintainer to decide whether to implement, close as won't-fix, or confirm the reporter's guess that file:/// repos are already trusted by default. Repo inspection tools were unavailable (no pinned SHA), so I could not verify whether the key requirement still exists in current code.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":21.0,"staleness":92,"complexity":40,"confidence":55,"support_request":30},"age_days":2010,"labels":[],"created_at":"2021-03-12T19:02:01.766871+00:00","updated_at":"2021-03-25T16:59:23.663262+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":92,"complexity":40,"support_request":30,"confidence":55,"impact":35,"quick_win":21.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29791,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1964329","title":"meson plugin uses internet access during build, instead of pull","author":"~xnox","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1964329","summary":"Meson plugin runs pip install during build stage instead of pull, consuming network time on RISC-V builds. 4.5 years old, zero comments, no labels, no maintainer response. Author planned to work around it manually.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"Issue has no labels, zero comments, and no maintainer interaction in 4.5 years, so it has never been triaged. The underlying concern (pip install during build vs pull in the meson plugin) is a valid architectural question, but I could not verify via code inspection whether the current meson plugin still exhibits this behavior, so a maintainer needs to confirm relevance before closing or fixing.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":22.0,"staleness":92,"complexity":45,"confidence":55,"support_request":15},"age_days":1648,"labels":[],"created_at":"2022-03-09T10:17:30.294362+00:00","updated_at":"2022-03-09T10:17:30.294362+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":92,"complexity":45,"support_request":15,"confidence":55,"impact":40,"quick_win":22.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29740,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1921418","title":"wrong architecture of stage-snaps when cross building","author":"~ondrak","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1921418","summary":"Cross-building with stage-snaps downloads the wrong architecture snap (tested on snapcraft 4.6). No comments, no activity for ~5 years, tracked under Jira label craft-415.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue was tested against snapcraft 4.6 (circa 2021) and has had zero comments or activity for ~5 years (last activity 1858 days ago). The tested version is long out of support and the cross-build architecture handling code has undergone significant refactoring in subsequent major releases. Without any maintainer acknowledgement or reproduction on a current version, the issue is no longer actionable in its original form.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":20.25,"staleness":92,"complexity":55,"confidence":55,"support_request":5},"age_days":1997,"labels":["craft-415"],"created_at":"2021-03-25T18:25:44.066655+00:00","updated_at":"2021-07-30T20:10:34.320843+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":92,"complexity":55,"support_request":5,"confidence":55,"impact":45,"quick_win":20.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":22841,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"241","title":"Add groups dependency support","author":"sergio-costas","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/pull/241","summary":"Adds 'groups' to parts for dependency management via 'after'. Author moved it from snapcraft to craft-parts in July 2022, asked maintainer for naming feedback, then went silent. No reviewer engagement in 23 months. Codebase has since undergone major changes (pydantic 2, overlays, partitions).","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The PR is 4+ years old with last activity 23 months ago. The author asked @sergiusens for naming feedback ('groups' vs 'set', 'cluster', 'unit') in July 2022 and never received a response. The codebase has since undergone a pydantic 2 migration, added overlays and partitions, and significantly restructured parts.py, making this small +44/-1 diff incompatible without a full rework. The feature (part groups) is still unimplemented, but this specific implementation is no longer applicable.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":30.0,"staleness":92,"complexity":25,"confidence":78},"age_days":1531,"labels":[],"created_at":"2022-07-04T11:25:51+00:00","updated_at":"2024-10-03T22:18:10+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":92,"complexity":25,"support_request":null,"confidence":78,"impact":40,"quick_win":30.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":12423,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"650","title":"chore: mark redundant functions as deprecated.","author":"lengau","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/pull/650","summary":"Marks redundant functions as deprecated across 15 files. Open 563 days with no reviews, comments, or CI. Deprecation work appears superseded by subsequent PRs (#660, #768, #1078) and codebase has evolved through multiple major versions.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"PR is 563 days old with zero activity, reviews, or CI. The deprecation work it targets has been addressed in subsequent merged PRs: #660 marked ServiceFactory.set_kwargs() deprecated, #768 marked Application._set_global_environment deprecated, and #1078 removed deprecated APIs entirely. The codebase has advanced from ~4.x to 7.3.0, making this diff almost certainly unmergeable without a full rebase.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":14.0,"staleness":92,"complexity":30,"confidence":60},"age_days":576,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-02-14T05:09:50+00:00","updated_at":"2025-02-14T05:10:00+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":92,"complexity":30,"support_request":null,"confidence":60,"impact":20,"quick_win":14.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29361,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1775582","title":"`organize:{ /: another-dir/ }` causes the items under host root directory to be copied in another-dir","author":"~brlin","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1775582","summary":"Bug report (8+ years old, 0 comments, no labels) that `organize: /: patches/` copies the build host's root directory contents into the part install dir instead of just the patch file. Organize logic since rewritten in craft-parts; never triaged by a maintainer.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"No labels, no maintainer comments, no assignee — never triaged. It is a genuine bug report (not a support question), so close_not_a_bug doesn't fit, and inactivity alone is insufficient for close_stale without confirming it's no longer reproducible. The organize code has been substantially rewritten in craft-parts (craft_parts/executor/organize.py), so a maintainer should verify whether the `/` key still misbehaves before closing.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":13.5,"staleness":92,"complexity":55,"confidence":55,"support_request":20},"age_days":3019,"labels":[],"created_at":"2018-06-07T11:09:33.252802+00:00","updated_at":"2018-10-13T07:52:16.981077+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":92,"complexity":55,"support_request":20,"confidence":55,"impact":30,"quick_win":13.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29409,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1794955","title":"snapcraft erroneously errors when deleting non-existent multipass container","author":"~popey","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1794955","summary":"snapcraft clean fails with 'instance does not exist' when the multipass container is already gone; reporter suggests treating it as a no-op. Open since 2018, unlabeled, no maintainer activity for ~7.9 years.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The bug was reported against the snapcraft 2.x-era multipass integration (~2018) and has had zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction for ~7.9 years; the affected version is long obsolete and the current codebase has been restructured around a services-based architecture, so the original error path is no longer applicable. The closely related multipass cleanup failure #1904774 was likewise closed as abandoned, supporting closure rather than indefinite open status.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":18.75,"staleness":92,"complexity":25,"confidence":55,"support_request":10},"age_days":2906,"labels":[],"created_at":"2018-09-28T10:54:49.007224+00:00","updated_at":"2018-09-28T10:54:49.007224+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":92,"complexity":25,"support_request":10,"confidence":55,"impact":25,"quick_win":18.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29544,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1826005","title":"Running executable from /snap/bin hangs","author":"~knkski","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1826005","summary":"2018 report: Rust-built snap hangs via /snap/bin wrapper after store install, though the direct binary works; gdb shows a re-exec loop in snapd's snap-confine/snap-exec (core 6673). No labels, comments, or maintainer activity for 7 years.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"Zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction for ~7 years (last activity 2564 days ago). The gdb trace localizes the hang to snapd's runtime (snap-confine/snap-exec in core 6673, a 2018-era core), not to snapcraft's build process — the reporter notes the binary runs fine directly and when installed locally — so there is nothing to fix in this repo and the affected snapd version is long out of support.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":13.5,"staleness":92,"complexity":55,"confidence":65,"support_request":10},"age_days":2699,"labels":[],"created_at":"2019-04-23T15:30:17.254288+00:00","updated_at":"2019-08-24T16:11:20.125846+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":92,"complexity":55,"support_request":10,"confidence":65,"impact":30,"quick_win":13.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29561,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1829564","title":"snapcraft clean crashes on snapcraft.yaml with bad indent","author":"~dank","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1829564","summary":"snapcraft 2.43.1 (Ubuntu 19.04) crashes with a raw PyYAML traceback when snapcraft.yaml has inconsistent indentation. 7+ years old, no labels, no comments, and the affected 2.x version is long out of support.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The report targets snapcraft 2.43.1 on Ubuntu 19.04, a version line that has been out of support for years, and the current codebase is the 3.x rewrite (snapcraft/models, snapcraft/commands) with a different YAML-handling layer than the 2.x code that produced this traceback. The issue has had zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction for over 6 years, and the near-identical Launchpad bug 1608032 was already closed as abandoned, so it is no longer actionable as reported.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":18.75,"staleness":92,"complexity":25,"confidence":60,"support_request":15},"age_days":2675,"labels":[],"created_at":"2019-05-17T17:02:26.536744+00:00","updated_at":"2020-06-17T17:23:33.516356+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":92,"complexity":25,"support_request":15,"confidence":60,"impact":25,"quick_win":18.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29866,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1990166","title":"Snapcraft 7 silently ignores any files ending in *.snap when the source is a folder","author":"~itrue","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1990166","summary":"Snapcraft 7 silently ignores *.snap files in source folders. Valid bug with reproduction, never triaged, 1445 days old.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 1445 days old with zero maintainer interaction or labels, and was reported against snapcraft 7.1.3 (core22 base) which is no longer the current supported version. While the underlying behavior in craft-parts (snap_source.py line 41: pattern = r\"\\.snap$\") still exists and the bug report is valid, the age and lack of any follow-up make it stale. The issue should be closed with a note that the behavior persists in craft-parts but the specific version context is outdated.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":19.25,"staleness":90,"complexity":45,"confidence":70,"support_request":0},"age_days":1454,"labels":[],"created_at":"2022-09-19T15:33:42.499693+00:00","updated_at":"2022-09-19T16:19:33.708563+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":90,"complexity":45,"support_request":0,"confidence":70,"impact":35,"quick_win":19.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":13591,"project_name":"craft-cli","source":"github","external_id":"149","title":"Discuss whether we should maintain 'line-length = 99'","author":"tigarmo","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-cli/issues/149","summary":"Discussion on whether to keep line-length = 99 or align with Starbase's default of 88. Resolved in practice: the codebase now uses 88 (ruff, isort, sphinx-lint) after the starbase migration; no activity since June 2023.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The question has been answered by the codebase: pyproject.toml now sets [tool.ruff] line-length = 88, isort line_length = 88, and common.mk runs sphinx-lint with --max-line-length 88, matching Starbase's default. A pickaxe search shows the 'line-length = 99' string was removed in the starbase merge commit (e05899f, PR #340), so the discussion is moot and the issue is inactive for ~3.2 years.","scores":{"impact":10,"quick_win":9.0,"staleness":90,"complexity":10,"confidence":80,"support_request":10},"age_days":1187,"labels":[],"created_at":"2023-06-13T15:37:47+00:00","updated_at":"2023-06-13T18:37:45+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":90,"complexity":10,"support_request":10,"confidence":80,"impact":10,"quick_win":9.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29181,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1695251","title":"'git' version not expanded in version-script","author":"~stub","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1695251","summary":"Request to expand 'git' version before running version-script so SNAPCRAFT_PROJECT_VERSION holds the real version. version-script is deprecated/removed in current snapcraft (only docs reference remains), so the feature no longer exists.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 3377 days old with zero comments and no maintainer interaction. The version-script feature it targets has been deprecated (commit 59ec3601b 'deprecations: add deprecation notice for version-script') and no longer appears in the codebase (only a docs migration note remains), so the original problem is no longer applicable to current snapcraft.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":9.0,"staleness":90,"complexity":40,"confidence":70,"support_request":20},"age_days":3389,"labels":[],"created_at":"2017-06-02T11:04:56.354711+00:00","updated_at":"2017-06-02T14:00:36.646009+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":90,"complexity":40,"support_request":20,"confidence":70,"impact":15,"quick_win":9.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":39841,"project_name":"craft-providers","source":"github","external_id":"876","title":"ci: add weekly tests on a variety of distros","author":"lengau","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-providers/pull/876","summary":"Adds weekly CI tests across multiple Linux distros using LXD; PR has been inactive for 266 days with multiple failing integration tests and no reviewer engagement","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"The PR adds CI infrastructure for weekly distro integration tests but has been inactive for 266 days with 0 comments and 18 failing CI checks across multiple distros (mint, debian, rockylinux, almalinux, centos, fedora, opensuse). A maintainer review is needed to determine whether to address the CI failures or close the PR.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":38.25,"staleness":90,"complexity":15,"confidence":50},"age_days":274,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-12-13T03:43:17+00:00","updated_at":"2025-12-13T04:42:53+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":90,"complexity":15,"support_request":null,"confidence":50,"impact":45,"quick_win":38.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":27678,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"2012503","title":"wrong arch of stage packages","author":"~ondrak","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2012503","summary":"Snapcraft 7.3 picks host architecture for stage packages when cross-building (build-on amd64, build-for arm64). No maintainer response in 3.4 years. Nearly identical issue #5335 was closed as expected behavior requiring explicit :$CRAFT_ARCH_BUILD_FOR suffix on stage packages.","suggested_action":"close_not_a_bug","suggested_action_reason":"Issue #5335 ('build-on when running snapcraft locally uses stage packages from the wrong architecture') is nearly identical and was closed as expected behavior — the maintainer clarified that local cross-compilation requires suffixing stage packages with :$CRAFT_ARCH_BUILD_FOR and adding the ubuntu ports repository, with documentation added. This issue (3.4 years old, 0 comments, no labels) describes the same expected behavior and is effectively a duplicate of that resolved question.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":12.75,"staleness":90,"complexity":15,"confidence":72,"support_request":80},"age_days":1270,"labels":[],"created_at":"2023-03-22T11:07:40.041025+00:00","updated_at":"2023-04-18T17:36:02.383158+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":90,"complexity":15,"support_request":80,"confidence":72,"impact":15,"quick_win":12.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29214,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1720207","title":"snapcraft list-keys returns no keys, but the user has keys","author":"~elopio","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1720207","summary":"Maintainer elopio reported snapcraft list-keys showing an empty table despite the user having a registered key, while create-key says a 'default' key exists. Zero comments, no activity for ~6.4 years; the list-keys command has since been removed and replaced by keys.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The reported command no longer exists: per snapcraft (launchpad)#1637625, list-keys was removed and replaced by the keys command, and the reporter's own repro shows `snapcraft keys` correctly lists the default key. With zero comments and no activity for ~6.4 years, the original problem is no longer reproducible, so the issue is obsolete rather than merely inactive.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":10.0,"staleness":90,"complexity":50,"confidence":70,"support_request":20},"age_days":3271,"labels":["store"],"created_at":"2017-09-28T18:28:54.639494+00:00","updated_at":"2020-03-30T16:11:57.280949+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":90,"complexity":50,"support_request":20,"confidence":70,"impact":20,"quick_win":10.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":28121,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1889081","title":"snapcraft does not detect need to re-clean part after permission bits change on file","author":"~anonymouse67","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1889081","summary":"Snapcraft fails to detect permission-bit-only changes in dump part source files, requiring manual clean before re-priming. Untriaged, no maintainer activity in ~5.5 years; related Launchpad bug still open.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no comments, and no maintainer interaction in ~5.5 years (last activity 2013 days ago), so it has never been triaged. However, the closely related Launchpad bug #1822709 ('Snapcraft should consider dump part's file permission change as part changed') is still open, suggesting the dirty-state detection gap may persist in current snapcraft, so closing as stale would be premature. A maintainer should verify whether the parts system now tracks file mode changes before deciding.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":16.5,"staleness":90,"complexity":45,"confidence":55,"support_request":10},"age_days":2238,"labels":[],"created_at":"2020-07-27T13:48:11.560921+00:00","updated_at":"2021-02-25T14:07:14.063585+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":90,"complexity":45,"support_request":10,"confidence":55,"impact":30,"quick_win":16.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29983,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"2049617","title":"ubuntu-desktop-installer LD_LIBRARY_PATH not defined anymore","author":"~seb128","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2049617","summary":"Classic snap shell environment no longer sets LD_LIBRARY_PATH, possibly a snapcraft 8.0.1 regression. Untriaged, no maintainer engagement in 961 days.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no maintainer response, no assignee, and 0 comments after 961 days. Per guidelines, untriaged issues should be marked needs_triage regardless of age. The LD_LIBRARY_PATH behavior for classic snaps needs maintainer assessment to determine if this is still a valid concern in current versions.","scores":{"impact":60,"quick_win":36.0,"staleness":90,"complexity":40,"confidence":50,"support_request":30},"age_days":969,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-01-17T10:54:09.135660+00:00","updated_at":"2024-01-17T12:06:33.687944+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":90,"complexity":40,"support_request":30,"confidence":50,"impact":60,"quick_win":36.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29369,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1778719","title":"appstream support lacking provided ids (impairing backwards compat)","author":"~apachelogger","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1778719","summary":"Snapcraft's appstream extractor and common-id mapping assume a single id per appstream file, ignoring <provides> ids needed for backwards compatibility and de-duplication. No maintainer response, no labels, 0 comments, last activity 2463 days ago.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has 0 comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction in ~6.7 years, so it has never been triaged. It is a genuine feature/bug report (not a support request) with a concrete proposed fix (supplemental-common-id key or array common-id, plus parsing <provides> ids), but the repo tooling failed to pin a SHA so I could not verify whether the appstream extractor or common-id schema has since changed. Given the age and the possibility the appstream handling has been reworked, a human should confirm current relevance before closing or keeping open.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":14.0,"staleness":90,"complexity":65,"confidence":55,"support_request":5},"age_days":3000,"labels":["19.04","19.04-blue","19.04-external"],"created_at":"2018-06-26T13:13:46.727424+00:00","updated_at":"2019-12-03T14:15:11.759438+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":90,"complexity":65,"support_request":5,"confidence":55,"impact":40,"quick_win":14.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":27657,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1882535","title":"[focal/core20][python3.7+] staging conflicts when multiple python parts have the same python dependencies","author":"~dmitriis","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1882535","summary":"Staging conflicts when multiple python parts share identical dependencies: Python 3.7+ .pyc files embed source timestamps, so identical sources produce different .pyc/RECORD hashes across parts. Reported for focal/core20, no maintainer response, 0 comments, open ~6 years.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction in ~6 years, so it has never been triaged. It is a genuine bug (reproducible staging conflict with clear root-cause analysis and a proposed SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH workaround), not a support request, but the focal/core20 target is now an EOL base, so a maintainer needs to decide whether to address it in current bases or close it as outdated.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":90,"complexity":55,"confidence":60,"support_request":15},"age_days":2287,"labels":[],"created_at":"2020-06-08T13:07:47.524946+00:00","updated_at":"2023-11-11T03:03:07.214649+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":90,"complexity":55,"support_request":15,"confidence":60,"impact":40,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":16376,"project_name":"starflow","source":"github","external_id":"6","title":"feat: Security scanner","author":"lengau","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/starflow/pull/6","summary":"Adds a security scanner GitHub workflow using the secscan API; author notes it doesn't work yet because runners lack access. Pending review, no CI, no comments, inactive for ~19 months.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The PR is 705 days old with last activity 634 days ago, zero comments, and no CI runs. The author explicitly states it 'doesn't work yet because we don't have runners with access' — an external dependency that has never been resolved, and no evidence the secscan workflow was ever implemented elsewhere in the repo. The change is small (+106/-0, 2 files) and the feature (security scanning) remains relevant, but the PR has been blocked on infrastructure for ~2 years with no maintainer follow-up.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":24.0,"staleness":90,"complexity":20,"confidence":55},"age_days":717,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-09-25T21:28:35+00:00","updated_at":"2024-12-05T21:46:36+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":90,"complexity":20,"support_request":null,"confidence":55,"impact":30,"quick_win":24.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29408,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1794814","title":"snapcraft.yaml does not allow WatchdogSec for systemd services","author":"~presto88","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1794814","summary":"Feature request to add a watchdog-sec field to snapcraft.yaml so generated systemd units set WatchdogSec, enabling daemon:notify watchdog restarts. Open ~8 years, no labels, no comments, no maintainer interaction.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, zero comments, and no maintainer response in ~8 years (last activity 2891 days ago), so it has never been triaged. It is a legitimate feature request (add watchdog-sec to the app schema and emit WatchdogSec in the generated .service file), but I could not verify via tools whether snapcraft now supports this, so a maintainer should confirm current schema support before closing or scoping it.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":24.75,"staleness":90,"complexity":45,"confidence":55,"support_request":20},"age_days":2907,"labels":[],"created_at":"2018-09-27T15:14:30.628644+00:00","updated_at":"2018-10-01T14:00:45.744433+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":90,"complexity":45,"support_request":20,"confidence":55,"impact":45,"quick_win":24.75,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29357,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1774254","title":"Wrong prefix is set in staged pkg-config files when alternate --prefix is configured","author":"~brlin","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1774254","summary":"Staged .pc files get prefix rewritten to $SNAPCRAFT_STAGE plus the original configure prefix, producing invalid paths when an alternate --prefix was used. Open since 2018, no labels or comments; pkg-config prefix handling has since been reworked in the codebase.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is a genuine bug report (invalid prefix in staged pkg-config files) with zero maintainer interaction, no labels, and no comments in 3015 days, so it has never been triaged. Git history shows the pkg-config prefix handling was reworked (e.g. 'fix: don't modify prefix for relocatable pkg-config files (#5157)' and 'fix_pkg_config removes prefixes from staged snap's .pc files (#3848)'), suggesting the behavior may have changed, but I could not confirm whether this exact alternate-prefix case is fixed, so a maintainer should verify before closing.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":90,"complexity":55,"confidence":55,"support_request":5},"age_days":3027,"labels":[],"created_at":"2018-05-30T18:54:35.047647+00:00","updated_at":"2018-05-30T18:54:35.047647+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":90,"complexity":55,"support_request":5,"confidence":55,"impact":40,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":27384,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1582469","title":"clean behavior is confusing","author":"~niemeyer","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1582469","summary":"Snapcraft 'clean' UX is confusing: forcing a part is skipped when cached, 'clean --step' errors, and removing phase content breaks internal state. Body specs un/re lifecycle commands and deprecating clean. 10 yrs old, last activity 5.3 yrs ago, craft-5 milestone.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is ~10 years old (3759 days) with last activity 1953 days ago and 0 comments, and carries the 'craft-5' milestone label, indicating it was targeted at a milestone that has long since shipped. The specific behaviors and error messages described (e.g. \"'snap' is not a valid step for part 'qt5-packages'\") are from the 18.10-era snapcraft, a version no longer supported, and the project has since undergone major architectural changes (craft-parts split, snapcraft 8.x). The underlying clean/re-run UX concern, if still present, would be better captured in a fresh issue against current snapcraft.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":24.75,"staleness":90,"complexity":45,"confidence":55,"support_request":10},"age_days":3771,"labels":["18.10-build-caching","clean","craft-5"],"created_at":"2016-05-17T01:52:32.184530+00:00","updated_at":"2021-04-27T01:14:01.621078+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":90,"complexity":45,"support_request":10,"confidence":55,"impact":45,"quick_win":24.75,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29978,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"2043513","title":"snapcraft export-login doesn't explain what the login file is","author":"~merlijn-sebrechts","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2043513","summary":"Help text for snapcraft export-login doesn't explain what the login-file is. Open for 1024 days with no maintainer response or comments.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"Issue is 1024 days old with zero maintainer engagement, no labels, and no comments. While it's a legitimate documentation improvement request, the extreme age and lack of activity indicate it's no longer relevant. The help text could have been updated in the intervening 2.8 years, and this is a trivial change that anyone could address.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":13.5,"staleness":90,"complexity":10,"confidence":70,"support_request":20},"age_days":1033,"labels":[],"created_at":"2023-11-14T20:08:47.854203+00:00","updated_at":"2023-11-14T20:17:06.551917+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":90,"complexity":10,"support_request":20,"confidence":70,"impact":15,"quick_win":13.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29779,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1950867","title":"remote-build: Support passing --enable-experimental-extensions & options in general","author":"~ppd","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1950867","summary":"Feature request to pass snapcraft options (e.g. --enable-experimental-extensions) to remote-build, blocked on Launchpad bug 1949989. The motivating kde-neon core20 case is resolved as the extension is no longer experimental. No activity for ~4.5 years.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"Zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction for ~4.5 years, and the concrete motivating case is obsolete: PR canonical/snapcraft#3598 declared kde-neon non-experimental for core20 (and Launchpad bug 1927806 was closed), so the original problem no longer applies. The general option-passing feature remains blocked on external Launchpad bug 1949989, leaving nothing actionable in the snapcraft repo.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":15.75,"staleness":90,"complexity":55,"confidence":65,"support_request":30},"age_days":1764,"labels":[],"created_at":"2021-11-13T19:10:11.194446+00:00","updated_at":"2022-02-21T10:47:01.933476+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":90,"complexity":55,"support_request":30,"confidence":65,"impact":35,"quick_win":15.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":27508,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1665658","title":"Add system enablement snaps to nightly build of snapcraft","author":"~morphis","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1665658","summary":"2016 request to add 13 system enablement snaps (network-manager, bluez, pulseaudio, etc.) to snapcraft's nightly build to catch build regressions. Zero comments, no maintainer activity for ~7 years; the referenced CI setup predates the project's move to spread tests and GitHub Actions.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 3482 days old with 0 comments and no maintainer interaction, and its last activity was 2576 days ago. It targets a 2016-era nightly-build setup referencing ~morphis/snappy-hwe-snaps Launchpad repos from the snapd 1.x era, while the current repo uses spread tests and GitHub Actions workflows, so the original request is no longer applicable to the project's current CI infrastructure.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":15.0,"staleness":90,"complexity":25,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":3494,"labels":["tests"],"created_at":"2017-02-17T14:31:21.370257+00:00","updated_at":"2019-08-12T17:59:40.504001+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":90,"complexity":25,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":20,"quick_win":15.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":28101,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1843404","title":"snapcraft export-login doesn't provide meaningful error messages when an argument is wrong","author":"~johanlorenzo","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1843404","summary":"snapcraft export-login returns a generic 'Authentication error: Failed to get macaroon' instead of a meaningful message when an argument (e.g. snap name) is wrong. Unlabelled, zero comments, no maintainer interaction for ~7 years.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no comments, and no maintainer response in ~7 years, so it has never been triaged. The underlying problem (generic 'Authentication error: Failed to get macaroon' masking the real cause, e.g. an invalid snap name) is a legitimate UX/bug report, not a support question, but there is no evidence it was ever assessed or that the error path was improved since. A maintainer should confirm whether the store auth error handling now surfaces server-side detail before deciding to keep or close.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":90,"complexity":40,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":2560,"labels":[],"created_at":"2019-09-10T09:17:31.859318+00:00","updated_at":"2019-10-03T20:45:26.640057+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":90,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29610,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1848513","title":"--debug does not expose appropriate environment variables","author":"~racb","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1848513","summary":"Snapcraft --debug drops user into a shell on command failure but does not propagate the environment variables (SNAPCRAFT_* and Python-specific vars) the failing command relied on, so the failure cannot be reproduced. 7 years old, no labels, no maintainer interaction.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is ~7 years old (2510 days) with zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction, and it references snapcraft 1.x-era concepts (snapcraftctl pull, override-pull) that no longer exist in the current craft-parts/craft-application-based architecture. The --debug shell behavior is now implemented in craft-application (acad93da 'feat: implement, --shell, --shell-after, --debug'), so the original reproduction context is from an unsupported version and the specific scenario is no longer applicable as written.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":15.75,"staleness":90,"complexity":55,"confidence":55,"support_request":10},"age_days":2522,"labels":[],"created_at":"2019-10-17T13:42:37.136740+00:00","updated_at":"2019-10-18T13:17:51.947559+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":90,"complexity":55,"support_request":10,"confidence":55,"impact":35,"quick_win":15.75,"has_related_links":false},{"id":4868,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"807","title":"test: [PROTOTYPE] confirm npm symlink fix with spread","author":"bepri","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/pull/807","summary":"Prototype spread test (7 files, +51/-11) by maintainer bepri to confirm an npm symlink fix; pending review, no CI, no comments, inactive for 571 days.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The PR is a self-labeled [PROTOTYPE] test-only change with zero comments, no CI, and no activity for 571 days. The npm plugin it targets has since moved to craft-parts (craft-parts#1448 self-contained support, #1462 npm-use), so this rockcraft-local prototype is superseded and no longer applicable.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":14.0,"staleness":90,"complexity":30,"confidence":55},"age_days":583,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-02-06T14:44:44+00:00","updated_at":"2025-02-06T14:44:44+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":90,"complexity":30,"support_request":null,"confidence":55,"impact":20,"quick_win":14.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":46496,"project_name":"fetch-service","source":"github","external_id":"231","title":"Fetch-service snap doesn't start after refresh","author":"simonepelosi","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/fetch-service/issues/231","summary":"Fetch-service snap requires manual restart after refresh. Maintainer explained this is intentional and suggested refresh-mode=endure. No follow-up in 390 days.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The maintainer (@lengau) responded explaining the behavior is intentional and proposed a solution (setting refresh-mode to endure). However, there has been no follow-up for 390 days, and the internal Jira ticket (CRAFT-3568) status is unknown. The issue is 712 days old with no recent activity, making it stale.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":26.25,"staleness":90,"complexity":25,"confidence":75,"support_request":75},"age_days":716,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-09-26T16:46:18+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:15:38+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":90,"complexity":25,"support_request":75,"confidence":75,"impact":35,"quick_win":26.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":4730,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"945","title":"feat: [wip] usrmerged parts by default","author":"tigarmo","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/pull/945","summary":"WIP PR to enable usrmerged parts by default. Inactive for 369 days with failing CI. The feature has since been implemented and merged via commit 1c4a9d78 (usrmerged install dirs for 25.10+) and documented in 1.15.0 release notes.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The PR is a WIP with no activity for 369 days and failing CI (snap-tests, Fast/Slow tests on noble and jammy). The feature it targets is already implemented in main: commit 1c4a9d78 'feat: use usrmerged install dirs for 25.10+' sets usrmerged_by_default=True in lifecycle.py, and the 1.15.0 release notes document 'Improved usrmerge support'. This PR is superseded.","scores":{"impact":5,"quick_win":3.5,"staleness":90,"complexity":30,"confidence":85},"age_days":381,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-08-27T12:44:43+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-27T15:40:38+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":90,"complexity":30,"support_request":null,"confidence":85,"impact":5,"quick_win":3.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":30003,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"2065278","title":"flutter plugin: cache SDK across parts","author":"~saviq","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2065278","summary":"Feature request to cache Flutter SDK across parts. Issue is 848 days old with no maintainer interaction, labels, or comments.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 848 days old with no maintainer interaction or activity. While the flutter plugin appears to still exist (6 hits in repo), the lack of engagement over such a long period suggests the project has moved on, making this feature request effectively stale and irrelevant to current development priorities.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":28.0,"staleness":90,"complexity":30,"confidence":60,"support_request":20},"age_days":857,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-05-09T09:54:21.645571+00:00","updated_at":"2024-05-09T09:54:21.645571+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":90,"complexity":30,"support_request":20,"confidence":60,"impact":40,"quick_win":28.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29944,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"2015640","title":"npm ERR! `unsafe-perm` is not a valid npm option","author":"~lool","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2015640","summary":"npm plugin fails with npm >= 10 due to unsupported 'unsafe-perm' config. Issue is stale (1244 days old) and the problematic code has been removed from craft-parts.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The reported bug (npm config set unsafe-perm true causing errors with npm >= 10) has been resolved — the current craft-parts npm_plugin.py no longer contains any 'unsafe-perm' references and uses a different install strategy for npm >= 10. The issue is 1244 days old with no activity for 1075 days, making it stale and irrelevant.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":35.0,"staleness":90,"complexity":30,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":1253,"labels":[],"created_at":"2023-04-08T17:03:51.623484+00:00","updated_at":"2023-09-24T11:54:55.919256+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":90,"complexity":30,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":50,"quick_win":35.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29088,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1661070","title":"Default pkg-config paths not found","author":"~mrjogo","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1661070","summary":"pkg-config's built-in absolute search paths don't match a snap's layout, so runtime scripts calling pkg-config (e.g. ROS gazebo_ros) fail; suggests setting PKG_CONFIG_PATH in wrappers. Open ~9.5 years, 0 comments, no maintainer response.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has 0 comments, no assignee, and only a 'robotics' topic label with no maintainer acknowledgement in ~9.5 years, so it has never been triaged. However, the repo shows 21 PKG_CONFIG_PATH hits, suggesting the variable may already be handled in the wrappers, so a maintainer should verify whether it is already fixed (and close as such) or still needs implementing rather than closing on age alone.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":24.0,"staleness":90,"complexity":40,"confidence":55,"support_request":15},"age_days":3510,"labels":["robotics"],"created_at":"2017-02-01T18:55:53.263984+00:00","updated_at":"2017-03-21T19:21:05.556907+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":90,"complexity":40,"support_request":15,"confidence":55,"impact":40,"quick_win":24.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":46485,"project_name":"fetch-service","source":"github","external_id":"501","title":"draft: reorder some lxd calls to trigger launchpad behavior","author":"tigarmo","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/fetch-service/pull/501","summary":"Draft PR to reorder LXD calls to trigger Launchpad behavior. No reviewer engagement, no comments, inactive for 309 days.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"This is a draft PR (title prefixed with 'draft:') that has been inactive for 309 days with zero reviewer engagement and zero comments. The change is minimal (+6/-4 lines in 1 file) and there is no evidence of maintainer interest or that the problem it addresses still exists. The PR shows clear signs of being abandoned.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":17.0,"staleness":90,"complexity":15,"confidence":70},"age_days":312,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-11-04T13:11:13+00:00","updated_at":"2025-11-04T14:20:10+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":90,"complexity":15,"support_request":null,"confidence":70,"impact":20,"quick_win":17.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29996,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"2060820","title":"`UBUNTU_STORE_AUTH_DATA_FILENAME` should be passed from Snapcraft to SnapD during build","author":"~jordanmg13","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2060820","summary":"Feature request to pass UBUNTU_STORE_AUTH_DATA_FILENAME env var from Snapcraft to SnapD during builds. Untriaged, 876 days old with no maintainer engagement.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"Issue is 876 days old with zero maintainer engagement, no labels, and no comments. The body references Snapcraft 7 specifically, suggesting it may be from an older version context. Without evidence this remains relevant to current versions, and given the complete lack of triage or discussion, it should be closed as stale.","scores":{"impact":55,"quick_win":30.25,"staleness":90,"complexity":45,"confidence":50,"support_request":35},"age_days":885,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-04-10T14:07:51.975851+00:00","updated_at":"2024-04-10T20:05:14.730906+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":90,"complexity":45,"support_request":35,"confidence":50,"impact":55,"quick_win":30.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":12101,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"973","title":"Test qa.yaml with starflow PR #101 changes","author":"Copilot","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/pull/973","summary":"Temporary test PR pinning qa.yaml starflow workflow refs to @copilot/use-pristine-ubuntu-action branch for cross-repo validation of starflow PR #101. 266 days old, zero activity, target file has since been modified multiple times.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The PR body explicitly states 'This is temporary for cross-repo validation' to test starflow PR #101 before merging. It is 266 days old with zero comments or maintainer interaction, and the target file qa.yaml has since been modified by at least 5 subsequent commits (#1131, #1090, #1088, #1030, #789), meaning the +7/-2 diff would conflict. The referenced branch @copilot/use-pristine-ubuntu-action almost certainly no longer exists, making the validation purpose obsolete.","scores":{"impact":5,"quick_win":4.75,"staleness":90,"complexity":5,"confidence":85},"age_days":278,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-12-08T21:04:08+00:00","updated_at":"2025-12-08T21:16:01+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":true,"staleness":90,"complexity":5,"support_request":null,"confidence":85,"impact":5,"quick_win":4.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29971,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"2036424","title":"Mantic s390x install fails: grep-status: *** stack smashing detected ***: terminated","author":"~dbungert","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2036424","summary":"grep-status crashes with stack smashing on s390x during Mantic installation, causing subiquity to fail. Issue is 1081 days old with no maintainer comments.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"Mantic (23.10) is no longer the current Ubuntu release and has reached end of standard support, making this issue no longer applicable. Additionally, the reported crash is in dpkg's grep-status tool (a system package), not in snapcraft code itself, so this issue is not actionable in this repository.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":32.0,"staleness":90,"complexity":20,"confidence":75,"support_request":0},"age_days":1090,"labels":["installation","iso-testing","mantic","s390x"],"created_at":"2023-09-18T12:39:51.084596+00:00","updated_at":"2025-03-21T07:47:39.884715+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":90,"complexity":20,"support_request":0,"confidence":75,"impact":40,"quick_win":32.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29253,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1736812","title":"automatic dep resolution fails with link loops","author":"~xordspar0","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1736812","summary":"Snapcraft's automatic dependency resolution fails when a package installs a symlink loop (X11/X11 -> .), erroring that install and stage paths are the same file. Unlabelled, zero comments, no maintainer activity in ~8.7 years.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The report is a genuine bug (clear error message and reproducible scenario: X11 package installs /usr/bin/X11/X11 as a symlink to '.'), but it has no labels, no assignee, and zero comments in ~8.7 years, so it has never been triaged. Code inspection tools failed (no pinned SHA), so I could not confirm whether the modern craft-parts-based copy logic still hits this; a maintainer should verify reproducibility on a current base before closing, since the 2015-era copy code has since been rewritten.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":90,"complexity":55,"confidence":55,"support_request":10},"age_days":3202,"labels":[],"created_at":"2017-12-06T22:15:15.814449+00:00","updated_at":"2017-12-06T22:15:15.814449+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":90,"complexity":55,"support_request":10,"confidence":55,"impact":40,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":28507,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1602258","title":"Support other distributions as sources (Fedora, Mageia, openSUSE, Debian) instead of Ubuntu","author":"~ngompa13","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1602258","summary":"RFE to support RPM-based distros (Fedora, openSUSE, CentOS, Mageia) and Debian as snap bases instead of Ubuntu-only. No activity for ~7 years. RPM source support and repo refactor done, but RPM-based bases were never implemented.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has 0 comments, last activity 2498 days ago, and its original technical premise (python-apt, apt 0.5 on RPM distros, pre-base snapcraft architecture) no longer applies to the current craft-parts-based codebase. Its own task list shows the actionable parts (RPM source via merged PR #870, repo refactor via merged PR #1192) are done, while the remaining RPM-based base request was never started and would need a fresh issue against the current architecture, which now has a 'base' concept (Ubuntu-only).","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":6.0,"staleness":90,"complexity":80,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":3714,"labels":["centos","debian","fedora","mageia","opensuse","rfe","rpm"],"created_at":"2016-07-12T13:21:41.636497+00:00","updated_at":"2019-10-29T21:31:56.317868+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":90,"complexity":80,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":30,"quick_win":6.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29869,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1990549","title":"snapcraft isn't context aware in displaying help text","author":"~dilyn-corner","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1990549","summary":"Feature request for context-aware CLI help based on snapcraft.yaml base. Open for over 4 years with no maintainer interaction or labels.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is a feature request for dynamic CLI help that has remained inactive for over 4 years with no maintainer response, labels, or assignee. Given the prolonged inactivity and lack of traction, it is unlikely to be prioritized without a new proposal or PR.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":22.5,"staleness":90,"complexity":25,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":1451,"labels":[],"created_at":"2022-09-22T15:30:16.439040+00:00","updated_at":"2025-04-22T12:53:49.860977+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":90,"complexity":25,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":30,"quick_win":22.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":28024,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1752459","title":"Not possible to close a channel for only a specific architecture","author":"~popey","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1752459","summary":"Request to close a snap channel for a specific architecture only (e.g. undo accidental stable release on arm64). Open ~8.5 years, zero comments, no labels, no maintainer engagement. Related Launchpad bug #1732501 still open.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"No maintainer has ever responded, labelled, or assigned this issue (0 comments, no labels, 3106 days old). The related Launchpad bug #1732501 is also open with zero engagement. The underlying need (per-arch channel close) is a legitimate feature gap — snapcraft close only operates on the local arch — but it has never been triaged. Cannot close as stale since the problem is likely still reproducible and no fix has landed; needs a maintainer to decide whether to implement or document a workaround.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":90,"complexity":40,"confidence":65,"support_request":15},"age_days":3118,"labels":[],"created_at":"2018-03-01T00:49:42.977085+00:00","updated_at":"2020-03-20T15:34:36.099183+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":90,"complexity":40,"support_request":15,"confidence":65,"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29385,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1784372","title":"snapcraft and other snap commands don't support a --debug for behind the scenes debugging information","author":"~rharding","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1784372","summary":"Feature request (2018) for a --debug flag on snapcraft/snap CLI commands to expose backend API/network activity for diagnosing hangs. Unlabelled, zero comments, no maintainer engagement in ~7 years. Current code already offers unified verbosity levels (quiet/brief/verbose/debug/trace) via --verbose/--verbosity/CRAFT_VERBOSITY_LEVEL and a --debug shell option, largely superseding the ask.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The request is from 2018 (2538 days since last activity, 0 comments, no labels) and the capability it asks for has since been implemented elsewhere: snapcraft 8.11 release notes document unified verbosity levels (quiet, brief, verbose, debug, trace) selectable via --quiet/--verbose/--verbosity or CRAFT_VERBOSITY_LEVEL for all commands, and --debug now exists on lifecycle commands (snapcraft/commands/core22/lifecycle.py) to open a shell for debugging. The original problem is no longer applicable to current versions, so the issue can be closed as superseded rather than kept open.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":21.0,"staleness":90,"complexity":40,"confidence":65,"support_request":25},"age_days":2966,"labels":[],"created_at":"2018-07-30T11:47:08.159128+00:00","updated_at":"2019-09-20T08:01:12.181649+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":90,"complexity":40,"support_request":25,"confidence":65,"impact":35,"quick_win":21.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":5486,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"188","title":"Consecutive runs of rockcraft pack fail","author":"arturo-seijas","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/188","summary":"Second 'rockcraft pack' run fails when overlay-script creates a group/user because the cached overlay already has them. Workaround is 'rockcraft clean'. 1300 days old, no maintainer response, no labels. Docs now recommend override-build with useradd/groupadd --root instead.","suggested_action":"close_not_a_bug","suggested_action_reason":"The overlay filesystem is intentionally cached between runs, so a non-idempotent overlay-script (bare 'addgroup' with no existence check) failing on the second run is expected behavior — the same conclusion reached in the related issue #57, where a maintainer identified leftover-state failures as expected and directed the user to 'rockcraft clean'. The project now documents the recommended pattern in docs/how-to/crafting/add-internal-user-to-a-rock.rst (added in #653): use override-build with 'useradd --root ${CRAFT_PART_INSTALL}' / 'groupadd --root ${CRAFT_PART_INSTALL}', which is inherently idempotent per-build and avoids the cached-overlay problem entirely.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":12.75,"staleness":90,"complexity":15,"confidence":75,"support_request":75},"age_days":1312,"labels":[],"created_at":"2023-02-08T12:39:59+00:00","updated_at":"2023-02-08T12:55:12+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":90,"complexity":15,"support_request":75,"confidence":75,"impact":15,"quick_win":12.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29857,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1989012","title":"package-repositories assumes architecture","author":"~ondrak","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1989012","summary":"snapcraft 7.1.3 incorrectly assumes architecture in package-repositories, hardcoding it in generated .sources files instead of omitting the field when not specified.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no maintainer comments, and is 1457 days old (~4 years). Without maintainer assessment or evidence that the behavior has been fixed or changed in newer snapcraft versions, it needs triage to determine current relevance. The issue is a legitimate bug report (not support), but its age and the project's likely evolution make it uncertain whether it still applies.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":35.0,"staleness":90,"complexity":30,"confidence":50,"support_request":20},"age_days":1466,"labels":[],"created_at":"2022-09-07T16:58:52.953589+00:00","updated_at":"2022-09-07T16:58:52.953589+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":90,"complexity":30,"support_request":20,"confidence":50,"impact":50,"quick_win":35.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":13605,"project_name":"craft-cli","source":"github","external_id":"135","title":"logging handler is not using any formater","author":"rgildein","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-cli/issues/135","summary":"craft-cli's _Handler.emit uses record.getMessage() instead of self.format(record), ignoring any formatter set on the handler. Code unchanged at HEAD; no labels, no maintainer response, 0 comments in 1312 days.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no assignee, and zero maintainer comments, showing no sign of ever being triaged. It is not stale-closable because the reported code (record.getMessage() at messages.py:393) still exists at HEAD and the observation remains valid, though it is a minor consistency nit since the Emitter never sets a formatter on the handler, so there is no user-visible behavior change.","scores":{"impact":10,"quick_win":8.5,"staleness":90,"complexity":15,"confidence":85,"support_request":10},"age_days":1324,"labels":[],"created_at":"2023-01-27T10:13:32+00:00","updated_at":"2023-01-27T10:13:41+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":90,"complexity":15,"support_request":10,"confidence":85,"impact":10,"quick_win":8.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29026,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1636981","title":"when a validation already exists, the error message is not nice and is displayed after entering the password","author":"~elopio","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1636981","summary":"snapcraft validate shows a raw 409 error (with snap-id) only after the user enters their GPG passphrase when a validation already exists; the error should appear before signing and be human-readable. No comments, no activity for ~5.6 years.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue dates from the snapcraft 1.x era (~2016, per the test name 'u1test201610261026' and key creation date) and has had zero comments with no activity for ~5.6 years. Snapcraft has since gone through multiple major rewrites (2.0 through 8.x), so the specific validation signing flow and raw 409 error handling described here are very likely no longer representative of current behavior. The affected version is no longer supported.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":90,"complexity":40,"confidence":45,"support_request":10},"age_days":3608,"labels":["store"],"created_at":"2016-10-26T20:06:11.277120+00:00","updated_at":"2021-01-20T14:50:23.465528+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":90,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":45,"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":46489,"project_name":"fetch-service","source":"github","external_id":"430","title":"docs: docstrings for ./inspectors/common","author":"sergiusens","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/fetch-service/pull/430","summary":"Adds docstrings to ./inspectors/common. PR is 401 days old with no reviewer engagement and no comments.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"PR is 401 days old with zero comments and no maintainer engagement. While the docstring change itself is low-complexity, the extended inactivity combined with the likelihood that the code in ./inspectors/common has changed significantly since submission makes this PR obsolete. The author (sergiusens, a maintainer) has not responded to any feedback or updated the PR.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":13.5,"staleness":90,"complexity":10,"confidence":70},"age_days":405,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-08-03T21:47:32+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-03T21:47:35+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":90,"complexity":10,"support_request":null,"confidence":70,"impact":15,"quick_win":13.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":28148,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1982843","title":"Passthrough stopped working in 7.x","author":"~ted","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1982843","summary":"Regression: snapcraft 7.x rejects the valid 'passthrough' field in apps.<name> config with 'extra field not permitted', while 6.x accepts it. No maintainer response, 0 comments, ~4 years old.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"This is a genuine regression bug report (valid 'passthrough' field rejected in 7.x but accepted in 6.x) with a concrete reproducer link, but it has 0 comments, no maintainer acknowledgement, and no assignee — no sign of triage. The 'craft-1294' label appears to be a tracking/milestone tag rather than a resolution. Inactivity alone is not grounds to close, and there is no evidence the problem is fixed or no longer reproducible, so it should be triaged rather than closed.","scores":{"impact":55,"quick_win":33.0,"staleness":90,"complexity":40,"confidence":55,"support_request":10},"age_days":1509,"labels":["craft-1294"],"created_at":"2022-07-26T13:43:17.997700+00:00","updated_at":"2022-08-24T19:55:07.830642+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":90,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":55,"impact":55,"quick_win":33.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29235,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1732501","title":"it's not possible to close a channel for only one architecture","author":"~elopio","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1732501","summary":"Feature request: snapcraft close command lacks an architecture argument, so closing a channel affects all architectures. No maintainer response, no labels, no comments. Related Launchpad bug #1752459 also open with no activity.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue was filed by a maintainer (~elopio) as a feature request with no labels, no comments, and no activity in ~8.8 years. It has never been triaged, assigned, or acknowledged by other maintainers. The related Launchpad bug #1752459 is also open with zero engagement. While the feature (per-architecture channel close) is a reasonable CLI enhancement, it requires a store API change and CLI argument addition, making it non-trivial. No evidence it was implemented or superseded.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":90,"complexity":40,"confidence":55,"support_request":10},"age_days":3223,"labels":[],"created_at":"2017-11-15T17:20:15.867764+00:00","updated_at":"2017-11-15T17:20:15.867764+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":90,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":55,"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29124,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1668242","title":"\"snapcraft gated\" output doesn't have a clear order","author":"~ara","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1668242","summary":"Feature request to sort 'snapcraft gated' output by snap name (a-z) and by validation date (desc) per snap. Open since ~2017 with zero comments and no maintainer interaction; gated command still exists in the codebase.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is ~9.5 years old (3472 days) with 0 comments and no maintainer acknowledgement, and the gated command was later refactored/migrated (commit 21091b932 'refactor: migrate gated command (#6145)'), so the original output format and code path have changed substantially. The request is a minor cosmetic/UX improvement to output ordering, not a functional bug, and there is no evidence it was ever triaged or that the disorganized output persists in the current implementation.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":17.0,"staleness":90,"complexity":15,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":3484,"labels":["store"],"created_at":"2017-02-27T11:51:04.471075+00:00","updated_at":"2017-09-18T06:33:15.203786+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":90,"complexity":15,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":20,"quick_win":17.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29324,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1753250","title":"meson version out of date","author":"~bitseater","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1753250","summary":"2017-era report that snapcraft's meson plugin build environment pinned meson 0.29, missing the i18n/gettext module added in 0.30. No comments, no maintainer response; the plugin has since been rewritten, so the pinned old meson no longer applies.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 3102 days old with 0 comments and last activity 997 days ago, and the current codebase (snapcraft/parts/, linters/, extensions/) shows the meson plugin was rewritten on the modern craft-parts stack, so the build environment no longer pins meson 0.29 and the reported 'No module named mesonbuild.modules.i18n' ImportError is no longer reproducible. The reporter's own pip-based workaround is effectively what modern plugin behavior provides, making the original problem obsolete rather than merely inactive.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":12.0,"staleness":90,"complexity":20,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":3114,"labels":["gettext","i18n","meson","snap"],"created_at":"2018-03-04T13:14:06.443928+00:00","updated_at":"2023-12-08T13:42:17.381666+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":90,"complexity":20,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":15,"quick_win":12.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":27881,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1637623","title":"snapcraft create-key displays an ugly error when the keys don't match","author":"~elopio","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1637623","summary":"snapcraft create-key leaks a raw subprocess error when passphrases don't match. Labeled store/ui, filed by a maintainer, no comments for ~10 years; a related error-message bug was closed as abandoned.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is labeled (store, ui) and authored by a maintainer, so it was categorised, and it is a valid, well-scoped minor UI bug with a clear reproducer. The problem is likely still present: the related bug snapcraft (launchpad)#1979907 about the create-key error message was closed as abandoned with the fix never implemented, and there is no evidence of a fix here. It is very stale (~10 years of inactivity) but still applicable since create-key remains in the codebase, so close_stale is not justified.","scores":{"impact":10,"quick_win":8.5,"staleness":90,"complexity":15,"confidence":60,"support_request":0},"age_days":3606,"labels":["store","ui"],"created_at":"2016-10-28T19:34:13.641548+00:00","updated_at":"2016-11-08T06:18:14.782516+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":90,"complexity":15,"support_request":0,"confidence":60,"impact":10,"quick_win":8.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":39775,"project_name":"craft-providers","source":"github","external_id":"281","title":"multipass: do not always use sudo to execute commands","author":"mr-cal","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-providers/issues/281","summary":"Enhancement to make sudo behavior configurable in MultipassInstance.execute_run() and execute_popen(). Open 1200 days with no maintainer engagement or implementation.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"This enhancement has been open for 1200 days (over 3 years) with zero maintainer comments or engagement, indicating it was never prioritized. While the code still unconditionally wraps commands with sudo via _rootify_multipass_command(), the complete lack of maintainer interaction over such an extended period suggests this is not a current priority.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":28.0,"staleness":90,"complexity":30,"confidence":70,"support_request":20},"age_days":1208,"labels":["Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2023-05-23T17:43:31+00:00","updated_at":"2026-04-22T02:50:20+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":90,"complexity":30,"support_request":20,"confidence":70,"impact":40,"quick_win":28.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29444,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1803736","title":"meson plugin: Allow duplicate items in meson-parameters","author":"~brlin","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1803736","summary":"Feature request to allow duplicate items in meson-parameters by setting uniqueItems to False in the meson plugin schema. Related PR snapcraft#2410 was closed unmerged; fix tracked in bug #1803736. No maintainer response on the issue itself.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no comments, and no maintainer interaction in ~8 years (2845 days), so it has not been triaged. The companion PR snapcraft#2410 was closed unmerged (abandoned by author) and the fix is tracked in bug #1803736, so the underlying request is still open and valid, but the issue itself shows no sign of being assessed or prioritized.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":27.0,"staleness":90,"complexity":10,"confidence":55,"support_request":10},"age_days":2857,"labels":[],"created_at":"2018-11-16T15:59:59.615107+00:00","updated_at":"2018-11-16T15:59:59.615107+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":90,"complexity":10,"support_request":10,"confidence":55,"impact":30,"quick_win":27.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29934,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"2012290","title":"Feature request: create log of build environment settings and flags","author":"~igorljubuncic-deactivatedaccount","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2012290","summary":"Feature request to add build environment logging with a CLI flag for debugging. Untriaged, no maintainer engagement for 1263 days.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"This feature request is 1263 days old with zero maintainer engagement, no labels, and no comments. While the feature itself has merit (logging build environment for debugging), the complete lack of discussion or prioritization over 3.5 years suggests it was not a current priority. Without evidence that this has been implemented elsewhere or that the request is still relevant to current snapcraft versions, the issue has become stale.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"staleness":90,"complexity":40,"confidence":65,"support_request":20},"age_days":1272,"labels":[],"created_at":"2023-03-20T16:17:33.254233+00:00","updated_at":"2023-03-20T16:17:33.254233+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":90,"complexity":40,"support_request":20,"confidence":65,"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29657,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1865167","title":"Removing a hook script and building, script still present","author":"~knitzsche","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1865167","summary":"Snapcraft retains a deleted snap/hooks script in the rebuilt snap because the stale copy in prime/ is never removed; a full clean is required. Open ~6.5 years with zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer response.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The report is a legitimate bug (stale prime/ artifacts not cleaned on rebuild), but it has had zero maintainer interaction for ~6.5 years, no labels, and no assignee, so it has never been triaged. A near-identical report exists (snapcraft#1916333, 'removing a hook from snap/hooks does not remove it from prime/snap/hooks'), suggesting the same root cause in prime-directory cleanup, but no commit or PR evidence was available to confirm a fix, so it should be triaged rather than auto-closed.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":24.0,"staleness":90,"complexity":40,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":2388,"labels":[],"created_at":"2020-02-28T15:18:39.842322+00:00","updated_at":"2020-02-28T17:06:39.726025+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":90,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":40,"quick_win":24.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29268,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1740851","title":"Can’t run snapd on Codenvy 5.22.0","author":"~20avva","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1740851","summary":"User reports snapd socket missing in a Codenvy 5.22.0 workspace, so snap install fails with 'cannot communicate with server'. Issue was closed and redirected to Launchpad (snapd tracker); the environment problem remains unresolved. No comments, last activity ~3 years ago.","suggested_action":"close_not_a_bug","suggested_action_reason":"The failure is snapd not running in a containerized Codenvy workspace (missing /run/snapd.socket), not a snapcraft defect — the user confirms 'snapcraft-ing works normally'. The issue was already closed and redirected to Launchpad, the proper tracker for snapd, and the affected environment (Codenvy 5.22.0 / Ubuntu 16.04.3) is long outdated, so it should stay closed as not a snapcraft bug.","scores":{"impact":10,"quick_win":7.0,"staleness":90,"complexity":30,"confidence":80,"support_request":70},"age_days":3175,"labels":[],"created_at":"2018-01-02T10:58:03.751995+00:00","updated_at":"2023-07-27T23:29:53.865011+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":90,"complexity":30,"support_request":70,"confidence":80,"impact":10,"quick_win":7.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29706,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1886717","title":"Wrong version installed even when explicit","author":"~kenneth-loafman","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1886717","summary":"Report from ~6 years ago that a duplicity snap built with snapcraft got six 1.11.0 from Ubuntu repos instead of six>=1.12.0 from PyPI. No labels, no comments, no maintainer response; affected snapcraft 2.x era is long gone.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 2246 days old with zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction (last activity 1641 days ago). It describes pip behavior in the snapcraft 2.x-era python part (duplicity revision 104); the parts system has since been rewritten around craft-parts with the python part using a venv and installing from PyPI, so the original problem is very likely no longer reproducible in current snapcraft. Confidence is moderate because repo tooling was unavailable to confirm the current python part behavior.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":90,"complexity":40,"confidence":65,"support_request":20},"age_days":2258,"labels":[],"created_at":"2020-07-07T20:37:15.503391+00:00","updated_at":"2022-03-04T19:02:03.817085+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":90,"complexity":40,"support_request":20,"confidence":65,"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":27673,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1979154","title":"remote-build spams terminal ","author":"~popey","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1979154","summary":"snapcraft 7.0.7 remote-build prints progress updates on new lines instead of rewriting the line, spamming the terminal. Reported June 2022, no maintainer response, 0 comments, open ~4 years. Legacy remote-build code was later replaced by craft-application's implementation.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has zero comments, no maintainer acknowledgement, and no labels beyond the tracking label, so it has never been triaged. It is very old (1534 days, last activity 1531 days ago), but the legacy remote-build implementation it references was subsequently replaced by craft-application's remote-build (commit f31d99498), so it should be verified whether the behavior still reproduces on a current release before deciding to close it as stale or fixed.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":17.5,"staleness":90,"complexity":30,"confidence":60,"support_request":10},"age_days":1546,"labels":["craft-1150"],"created_at":"2022-06-19T22:39:45.369168+00:00","updated_at":"2022-06-22T11:24:03.928981+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":90,"complexity":30,"support_request":10,"confidence":60,"impact":25,"quick_win":17.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29470,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1807871","title":"Does not warn/error when no apps are defined","author":"~ev","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1807871","summary":"Feature request for snapcraft to warn or error when no apps are defined in snapcraft.yaml, and to add a lint check. 7.7 years old, no labels, no maintainer comments, never triaged.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no comments, and no assignee, showing it was never assessed by a maintainer. Although 7.7 years old with a core18 example, the underlying request (warn when no apps) is still a valid concept and there is no evidence it has been implemented, so it needs triage rather than closure.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":19.25,"staleness":90,"complexity":45,"confidence":45,"support_request":15},"age_days":2833,"labels":[],"created_at":"2018-12-11T09:22:42.113432+00:00","updated_at":"2018-12-11T09:22:42.113432+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":90,"complexity":45,"support_request":15,"confidence":45,"impact":35,"quick_win":19.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29777,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1950479","title":"Experimental offline mode fails with network present","author":"~igorljubuncic-deactivatedaccount","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1950479","summary":"Snapcraft's experimental --offline mode crashes with 'NoneType' object is not subscriptable in snaps.py when network is present, and lacks graceful failover. Reported ~4.8 years ago with no maintainer response; the offline feature was only ever added as a warning-only experimental flag.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 1755 days old with zero comments, no labels, and a deactivated reporter account, and the offline feature it targets was only ever merged as a warning-only experimental flag (PR #3577: 'triggers a warning and performs no actions until offline behavior stabilizes'), while the companion implementation PR #3571 '[WIP] offline' was abandoned and closed unmerged. The code paths in the traceback (build_providers/_snap.py, repo/snaps.py) have been substantially reworked since, so the original problem is no longer reproducible in current versions.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":11.25,"staleness":90,"complexity":55,"confidence":68,"support_request":10},"age_days":1767,"labels":["cache","caching","experimental","network","offline","snapcraft"],"created_at":"2021-11-10T15:00:54.407532+00:00","updated_at":"2021-11-10T15:00:54.407532+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":90,"complexity":55,"support_request":10,"confidence":68,"impact":25,"quick_win":11.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":27666,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1943603","title":"snapcraft --target-arch=i386 does not build i386 images, because core20 does not support i386 and yet the build starts and wastes time","author":"~colin-king","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1943603","summary":"Reports that snapcraft --target-arch=i386 on a core20 base silently builds an amd64 snap instead of failing early, wasting build time. Unlabelled, 0 comments, inactive ~5 years; a related core20/i386 bug was closed as superseded by improved arch parsing.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is unlabelled with zero comments and no maintainer interaction in ~5 years, so it has never been triaged. A closely related bug (snapcraft (launchpad)#1862256, 'complain loudly when building base: core20 snap on i386') was closed as superseded by improved architecture parsing that now rejects unsupported base-arch combinations, suggesting this may already be fixed, but I could not directly verify current code behavior, so a maintainer should confirm before closing.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":24.0,"staleness":90,"complexity":40,"confidence":55,"support_request":15},"age_days":1824,"labels":[],"created_at":"2021-09-14T14:24:42.357535+00:00","updated_at":"2021-09-28T11:22:35.846605+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":90,"complexity":40,"support_request":15,"confidence":55,"impact":40,"quick_win":24.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":28369,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1876370","title":"Python libraries installed by python path are not found in sys.path","author":"~ack","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1876370","summary":"Snapcraft 4.0 core20: Python parts install packages to $SNAP/lib/python3.8/site-packages but that path is missing from sys.path, so apps cannot import them. No labels, no comments, no maintainer response; last activity ~6.3 years ago.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no assignee, and zero comments — no maintainer has ever acknowledged or categorised it, so it has not been triaged. The reported behaviour (site-packages not on sys.path) is a plausible real bug, but the issue is ~6 years old with no follow-up, and I could not verify via code/issue search whether it was fixed or superseded (e.g. by the python part's virtualenv default), so a human should confirm before closing.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":20.25,"staleness":90,"complexity":55,"confidence":55,"support_request":25},"age_days":2325,"labels":[],"created_at":"2020-05-01T19:57:27.103515+00:00","updated_at":"2020-05-20T15:21:17.396621+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":90,"complexity":55,"support_request":25,"confidence":55,"impact":45,"quick_win":20.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":4863,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"812","title":"rockcraft insists on rebuilding part that has not changed","author":"nicolasbock","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/812","summary":"Rockcraft rebuilds the mariadb part when the unrelated scripts part changes, despite no dependency between them. Reported 565 days ago with no maintainer response, labels, or activity; the rebuild logic lives in craft-parts, not rockcraft.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"No labels, no maintainer comments, and no activity for 565 days, so it has never been triaged. The root cause is likely in craft-parts' dirty-state logic (state_manager), which I could not confirm as fixed via commit search, so it should be triaged rather than closed as stale.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":15.0,"staleness":90,"complexity":70,"confidence":55,"support_request":10},"age_days":577,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-02-12T14:50:21+00:00","updated_at":"2025-02-12T14:50:21+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":90,"complexity":70,"support_request":10,"confidence":55,"impact":50,"quick_win":15.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29902,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1999321","title":"Snapcraft is stuck on \"launching instance...\" indefinitely","author":"~mjakeman","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1999321","summary":"Snapcraft hangs indefinitely on 'launching instance...' on arm64 architectures (M1 Mac, Fedora 37 arm64, Asahi Linux). No maintainer response or labels after 1362 days.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no comments, and no maintainer response after 1362 days. While the extreme age suggests staleness, the fundamental nature of the bug (blocking snap builds on arm64) means it should be triaged to determine if it's still relevant or has been addressed in newer versions. Without concrete evidence that the problem has been fixed or the affected versions are no longer supported, closing would be premature.","scores":{"impact":80,"quick_win":32.0,"staleness":90,"complexity":60,"confidence":40,"support_request":20},"age_days":1372,"labels":[],"created_at":"2022-12-11T07:03:19.216773+00:00","updated_at":"2023-04-18T17:46:36.085262+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":90,"complexity":60,"support_request":20,"confidence":40,"impact":80,"quick_win":32.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29630,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1856502","title":"Obscure error message from snapcraft release when not logged in correctly","author":"~robert-ancell","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1856502","summary":"snapcraft release prints an obscure 401 macaroon error when not logged in; user suggests a friendlier message pointing to 'snapcraft login'. No labels, no comments, ~6.5 years inactive. Same problem class tracked in craft-store#97 and LP 1834469.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no comments, no assignee, and no maintainer response in ~6.5 years, so it shows no sign of ever having been categorised. It is not a candidate for close_stale because the underlying problem is still relevant and actively tracked elsewhere (craft-store#97, triaged with Jira ticket CRAFT-3385 and activity ~11 months ago), so a maintainer should decide whether to close it as a duplicate of that work or fold it in. Code inspection was unavailable (no pinned SHA), which slightly lowers confidence.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":29.75,"staleness":90,"complexity":15,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":2463,"labels":[],"created_at":"2019-12-16T03:20:51.272564+00:00","updated_at":"2020-03-18T21:23:47.237115+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":90,"complexity":15,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":35,"quick_win":29.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29901,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1999219","title":"snapcraft checks only default branch for submodules","author":"~ilya-fedin","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1999219","summary":"Snapcraft only checks default branch for submodules when building from non-default commits. Unlabeled, 0 comments, 1364 days old.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"This issue is 1364 days old with zero maintainer comments or labels. Since filing, craft-parts has received submodule-related fixes including d2845976 (fix(git): checkout commit before updating submodules #1600) and 3891f255 (sources: make submodule fetching configurable). Without confirmation from the reporter that the issue persists, and given the age and lack of engagement, it should be closed.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":22.5,"staleness":90,"complexity":55,"confidence":55,"support_request":20},"age_days":1374,"labels":[],"created_at":"2022-12-09T07:10:54.676286+00:00","updated_at":"2025-07-02T16:58:50.791355+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":90,"complexity":55,"support_request":20,"confidence":55,"impact":50,"quick_win":22.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":28383,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1911375","title":"Priming warning: \"not a dynamic executable\"  with cross build","author":"~woodrow-shen","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1911375","summary":"Cross-build priming emits 'not a dynamic executable' warnings; reporter asks if known and whether an arm64 linker/loader script is needed. No maintainer response, no labels, inactive ~5.6 years.","suggested_action":"close_not_a_bug","suggested_action_reason":"The reporter is asking whether the warning is known behavior and how to handle it (a usage/support question), and the current docs (docs/how-to/integrations/craft-a-cross-compiled-app.rst) explicitly document this exact 'not a dynamic executable' warning for cross-compiled apps and show how to suppress it via a lint section, so the behavior is expected and now documented. No maintainer ever triaged it and it has been inactive for over 5 years.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":17.5,"staleness":90,"complexity":30,"confidence":70,"support_request":75},"age_days":2069,"labels":[],"created_at":"2021-01-13T02:58:42.642504+00:00","updated_at":"2021-02-25T13:35:55.963746+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":90,"complexity":30,"support_request":75,"confidence":70,"impact":25,"quick_win":17.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":28792,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1869544","title":"snapcraft use cached packages across VMs","author":"~keshavnrj","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1869544","summary":"Feature request to cache apt packages centrally across snapcraft build VMs so they survive `snapcraft clean`. No labels or comments in 6+ years; premise tied to outdated-version Launchpad bug 1869542.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has had zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction for over 6 years, and its specific trigger — Launchpad bug 1869542 forcing `snapcraft clean` — is documented as an outdated-version bug unaddressed for over six years, so the concrete problem it describes is no longer applicable to current snapcraft. Confidence is moderate because the repo tools could not pin a snapcraft SHA, so I could not verify whether a cross-VM package cache was since implemented.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":14.0,"staleness":90,"complexity":60,"confidence":55,"support_request":30},"age_days":2359,"labels":[],"created_at":"2020-03-29T02:34:24.757669+00:00","updated_at":"2020-05-19T23:19:37.447232+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":90,"complexity":60,"support_request":30,"confidence":55,"impact":35,"quick_win":14.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29479,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1808896","title":"Relative path base poorly documented","author":"~racb","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1808896","summary":"Python plugin 'requirements' doc doesn't state what relative paths are based on, and the 'Failed to find the referred requirements file' error doesn't say where snapcraft looked. Reported on snapcraft 2.43.1; no labels, comments, or maintainer activity since.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue shows no sign of ever being triaged: no labels, 0 comments, no assignee, and no maintainer response in ~7.5 years. It is not safe to close as stale without evidence the request was addressed, because I could not verify (repo tooling returned 'No pinned SHA available' errors) whether current snapcraft docs now specify the base path or the error message now reports the searched location. A maintainer should check the current python plugin docs and error text before deciding to close or keep.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":24.0,"staleness":90,"complexity":20,"confidence":35,"support_request":40},"age_days":2826,"labels":[],"created_at":"2018-12-18T01:53:10.038410+00:00","updated_at":"2019-02-07T22:44:49.815032+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":90,"complexity":20,"support_request":40,"confidence":35,"impact":30,"quick_win":24.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":16304,"project_name":"starflow","source":"github","external_id":"78","title":"feat(test-python): Add Python 3.14 to the defaults","author":"lengau","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/starflow/pull/78","summary":"Adds Python 3.14 to the default test matrix in the test-python reusable workflow. Draft PR, 0 comments, no review, one failing CI job (Fast tests noble). The change was merged as #75 then reverted by #77.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The PR is 378 days old with zero comments or review activity, and the identical change was already merged as #75 (commit 8f69133) and then reverted by #77 (commit 0e7ae88), so this draft is superseded. The original blocker (PyO3 0.26 for Python 3.14) has since been resolved, so a fresh PR should be opened if 3.14 defaults are still wanted rather than reviving this stale draft.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":36.0,"staleness":90,"complexity":10,"confidence":80},"age_days":390,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-08-18T19:34:37+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-18T19:35:42+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":90,"complexity":10,"support_request":null,"confidence":80,"impact":40,"quick_win":36.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":28677,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1792078","title":"Snapcraft complain on a non-executable hook named `README.md`","author":"~brlin","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1792078","summary":"Snapcraft build fails when snap/hooks/ contains a non-executable README.md used to document sub-dirs; reporter argues only known hook names should be validated. Open ~8 years, zero comments, no labels or maintainer engagement.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no assignee, and zero comments or maintainer response in ~8 years (last activity 2191 days ago), so it has never been triaged. It is a plausible real bug (build failure on a README.md in snap/hooks/), but I could not confirm whether current snapcraft still treats every file in snap/hooks/ as a hook, so it needs a maintainer to assess relevance before any close decision.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":24.5,"staleness":90,"complexity":30,"confidence":55,"support_request":15},"age_days":2923,"labels":[],"created_at":"2018-09-12T05:18:24.713051+00:00","updated_at":"2020-08-31T08:10:49.848929+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":90,"complexity":30,"support_request":15,"confidence":55,"impact":35,"quick_win":24.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29893,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1996621","title":"Multiple levels of mixed prime inclusion/exclusion fail silently","author":"~lauren-brock","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1996621","summary":"Bug report about mixed prime inclusion/exclusion patterns failing silently without warnings in craft-parts fileset handling","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no maintainer comments, and has been inactive for 1388 days without assessment. It describes a clear bug in fileset handling where mixed inclusion/exclusion patterns (e.g., include 'one', exclude '-one/two', include 'one/two/three') fail silently without warnings. Despite its age, the issue was never triaged and the fileset logic in craft-parts still uses the same include/exclude pattern system, so the bug may still be relevant.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"staleness":90,"complexity":40,"confidence":60,"support_request":10},"age_days":1397,"labels":[],"created_at":"2022-11-15T15:36:37.095417+00:00","updated_at":"2022-11-15T15:36:37.095417+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":90,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":60,"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29620,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1851240","title":"using source-branch and source-tag not possible but no explanation in help why this is the case","author":"~ogra","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1851240","summary":"Request to document in `snapcraft help sources` that source-branch and source-tag are mutually exclusive for git sources (or allow both). Filed ~6.8 years ago by ogra with no labels, comments, or maintainer response; current state unverified.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no assignee, and zero comments or maintainer acknowledgement in 2492 days, so it has never been triaged. It is a legitimate, low-complexity documentation gap (help text should note source-branch/source-tag mutual exclusion), but I could not verify whether the current help/schema text still lacks the note because repo inspection tools failed with 'No pinned SHA available', so a maintainer should confirm before closing.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":17.0,"staleness":90,"complexity":15,"confidence":55,"support_request":20},"age_days":2504,"labels":[],"created_at":"2019-11-04T13:39:02.520174+00:00","updated_at":"2019-11-04T20:43:57.673584+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":90,"complexity":15,"support_request":20,"confidence":55,"impact":20,"quick_win":17.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":28793,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1886223","title":"snapcraft recommends bad naming standards","author":"~merlijn-sebrechts","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1886223","summary":"Reports that the snapcraft register CLI prompt implied third parties couldn't publish snaps and suggested username suffixes, contradicting store naming docs. No maintainer response; the referenced register command/prompt no longer exists in current snapcraft.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue (filed ~6 years ago, 0 comments, no labels or maintainer interaction) targets the prompt in snapcraft/cli/store.py#L48 shown by 'snapcraft register'. That command and its store.py prompt were removed in the snapcraft 4.0 rewrite (current tree has snapcraft/commands/ and snapcraft/store/, no cli/ module), so the exact reported message is no longer present in this codebase and the problem is no longer reproducible here. If the wording still matters, it lives in the store web UI, which is a separate project.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":17.0,"staleness":90,"complexity":15,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":2262,"labels":[],"created_at":"2020-07-03T18:41:08.982010+00:00","updated_at":"2021-03-18T13:30:43.960684+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":90,"complexity":15,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":20,"quick_win":17.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":4885,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"790","title":"different contents or permissions error","author":"yanksyoon","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/790","summary":"Rockcraft npm plugin with npm-include-node writes node_modules into /lib, colliding with a second part's libpq5_libs stage-packages, causing a 'different contents or permissions' merge error. No maintainer response in 587 days.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction in 587 days, so it has never been triaged. The expressjs extension now installs node_modules under /lib/node_modules/<app> and even documents a workaround for a similar ca-certificates merge conflict, but nothing in the repo addresses the raw npm-plugin /lib collision reported here, so it needs a maintainer to confirm whether it is a bug or expected craft-parts behavior.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":90,"complexity":55,"confidence":55,"support_request":30},"age_days":600,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-01-21T05:19:19+00:00","updated_at":"2025-01-21T08:00:10+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":90,"complexity":55,"support_request":30,"confidence":55,"impact":40,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29792,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1964418","title":"firefox just circles jig 2022-03-09","author":"~ac0xl","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1964418","summary":"User reports the Firefox snap freezing with a loading spinner on a Raspberry Pi 400 running Ubuntu 21.10, plus general venting about snaps vs apt. Misdirected to the snapcraft repo; no labels, comments, or maintainer response in ~4.5 years.","suggested_action":"close_not_a_bug","suggested_action_reason":"The reported problem is runtime behavior of the third-party Firefox snap (freezing, CPU usage) on a Raspberry Pi, not a defect in the snapcraft build tool that this repo contains — the body is mostly venting about snaps in general and an off-topic description of the reporter's personal website. It has zero labels, zero comments, and no maintainer engagement in ~4.5 years, and no reproducible snapcraft bug is described, so it should be closed as not a bug here and pointed toward the Firefox snap's own tracker.","scores":{"impact":5,"quick_win":4.25,"staleness":90,"complexity":15,"confidence":80,"support_request":85},"age_days":1648,"labels":[],"created_at":"2022-03-10T00:28:56.320057+00:00","updated_at":"2022-03-18T18:29:07.672900+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":90,"complexity":15,"support_request":85,"confidence":80,"impact":5,"quick_win":4.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29756,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1932032","title":"Progress shown in snapcraft status output is not accurate","author":"~suligap","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1932032","summary":"snapcraft status reports inaccurate progressive-release progress: store channelmap current-percentage not split by architecture, and snapcraft derives the non-progressive release's percentage as 100 minus the progressive one. No maintainer activity in ~5 years.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is a genuine bug report (not support) with zero comments, no labels beyond craft-338, and no maintainer interaction in ~1900 days, so it has never been triaged. It is not safe to close as stale because the underlying code path (snapcraft/store/channel_map.py still parses current-percentage, and status still reports progressive releases per commits #3306/#6189) may still contain the 100-minus-progressive calculation, but I could not confirm via tools whether the store-side fix (LP #1903046) was ever deployed or whether the snapcraft-side calculation was changed, so a maintainer should verify before acting.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":15.75,"staleness":90,"complexity":55,"confidence":60,"support_request":5},"age_days":1915,"labels":["craft-338"],"created_at":"2021-06-15T14:19:15.257966+00:00","updated_at":"2021-07-01T13:19:40.164476+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":90,"complexity":55,"support_request":5,"confidence":60,"impact":35,"quick_win":15.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":27437,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1615242","title":"etcd tree drives snapcraft dump plugin insane","author":"~sabdfl","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1615242","summary":"Infinite copy loop in the snapcraft dump plugin when building etcd with source: . and stage: bin/*. Reported 2016, 0 comments, no maintainer response, last activity ~5 years ago; dump plugin still exists in the current craft-parts-based codebase.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has 0 comments and no maintainer response in ~10 years, showing no sign of assessment, yet the dump plugin still exists in the current craft-parts-based codebase so I cannot confirm the infinite-copy bug is fixed or no longer reproducible. A human needs to determine whether this 2016 self-referential-copy bug still applies to the modern dump plugin before closing or prioritizing.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":90,"complexity":55,"confidence":55,"support_request":10},"age_days":3675,"labels":["craft-6","sources"],"created_at":"2016-08-20T15:05:35.969514+00:00","updated_at":"2021-04-27T01:14:08.279073+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":90,"complexity":55,"support_request":10,"confidence":55,"impact":40,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29700,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1883265","title":"\"loadinternal: cannot find runtime/cgo\" with base: core20, go.mod but no cgo in code","author":"~jdstrand","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1883265","summary":"Go plugin build fails on core20 with CGO_ENABLED=0 because the plugin passes -ldflags -linkmode=external, causing ld to look for cgo runtime objects. No maintainer response; reporter found override-build workaround and suggested dropping linkmode when CGO is disabled.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction in ~5.5 years, so it has never been triaged. The underlying concern (go plugin unconditionally passing -linkmode=external even when CGO_ENABLED=0) is a plausible bug in the plugin's build logic, and the reporter provided a working override-build workaround, but no maintainer has assessed whether the current plugin still exhibits this behavior.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":28.0,"staleness":90,"complexity":30,"confidence":70,"support_request":20},"age_days":2283,"labels":[],"created_at":"2020-06-12T14:17:55.086747+00:00","updated_at":"2021-03-25T17:17:38.349174+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":90,"complexity":30,"support_request":20,"confidence":70,"impact":40,"quick_win":28.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":5011,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"664","title":"Broken Symlinks when Ubuntu 24.04 with Python plugin and `override-prime` is used","author":"alithethird","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/664","summary":"Broken symlinks with Ubuntu 24.04 + Python plugin + override-prime; PR #498 fix doesn't apply in this scenario. Maintainer questioned user's config approach; no response to follow-up. Inactive 2 years.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer tigarmo asked two clarifying questions (whether the override-prime approach was intentional, and whether /srv/indico/indico.wsgi is actually present in the final rock) but the reporter never answered the second question. The issue has had zero activity for 2 years, and the maintainer's framing (\"unfortunate limitation of override-prime today\") plus the unaddressed questions indicate this was never confirmed as a reproducible bug.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":20.25,"staleness":90,"complexity":55,"confidence":65,"support_request":65},"age_days":767,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-08-06T11:33:43+00:00","updated_at":"2024-08-06T13:20:18+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":90,"complexity":55,"support_request":65,"confidence":65,"impact":45,"quick_win":20.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29655,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1864584","title":"Hotplug support docs say to use snapd edge channel but now supported in stable","author":"~drsteed","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1864584","summary":"Request to update snapcraft hotplug docs, which say snapd edge channel is required for USB hotplug slots, when stable now supports it. No labels, no comments, no maintainer activity for ~6.5 years.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, zero comments, and no maintainer interaction in 2380 days, so it has never been triaged. The fix itself is a trivial doc edit, but I could not verify whether the hotplug docs page has already been corrected (repo inspection was unavailable), so a maintainer should quickly check the current docs and either apply the fix or close as already addressed.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":90,"complexity":10,"confidence":55,"support_request":10},"age_days":2392,"labels":[],"created_at":"2020-02-25T02:03:59.788692+00:00","updated_at":"2020-02-25T02:03:59.788692+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":90,"complexity":10,"support_request":10,"confidence":55,"impact":20,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29617,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1849935","title":"Generated 'git describe' based version strings can exceed 32 character version limit","author":"~ec0","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1849935","summary":"2018 bug report: version: git can generate git-describe strings exceeding snapcraft's 32-character limit (e.g. 38 chars). No maintainer activity in ~6.7 years. The version: git feature has since been deprecated in favor of version-script/craftctl set version.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is inactive for ~6.7 years with zero comments and no maintainer engagement, and it is no longer applicable: the related closed issue #1812633 documents that 'version: git' was deprecated in favor of version-script:/craftctl set version=... specifically to avoid version strings exceeding snapd's 32-character limit, so the root cause no longer exists in current snapcraft. Closing as stale with a pointer to the replacement mechanism is appropriate.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":14.0,"staleness":90,"complexity":30,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":2514,"labels":[],"created_at":"2019-10-26T08:35:41.920076+00:00","updated_at":"2019-12-19T12:37:37.557874+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":90,"complexity":30,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":20,"quick_win":14.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":27789,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1590620","title":"snapcraft can generage snaps with a name longer than 107 characters","author":"~elopio","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1590620","summary":"Snapcraft only limits the generated snap file name, not the snap name itself, so it can build snaps whose names exceed the store's 107-character limit and fail at upload. Open since 2016, no labels or comments, untriaged.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer response in ~10 years, so it has never been assessed, making needs_triage the correct default. It is not a candidate for close_stale because the underlying problem (store enforces a 107-char name limit that snapcraft doesn't validate) is likely still reproducible and the fix is a simple validation addition; it is a real bug/missing validation, not a support request. Confidence is moderate because code inspection tools were unavailable, so I could not verify whether name-length validation was added in a later version.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":18.75,"staleness":90,"complexity":25,"confidence":60,"support_request":10},"age_days":3748,"labels":[],"created_at":"2016-06-09T00:09:02.670758+00:00","updated_at":"2016-09-08T02:04:45.924387+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":90,"complexity":25,"support_request":10,"confidence":60,"impact":25,"quick_win":18.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29642,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1861082","title":"[SRU] ubuntu-bug doesn't know how to file bugs against snaps","author":"~xnox","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1861082","summary":"SRU request to make ubuntu-bug/apport file bug reports against snaps. Fix was verified on focal (verification-done-focal) and shipped in Groovy; no activity for 6+ years and the 20.04 target is now EOL.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The SRU fix is already in place: the body states the change 'has been uploaded to Groovy some while ago where it is being used and tested,' and the verification-done-focal label confirms the focal backport was verified. The target release (Ubuntu 20.04) has reached end of standard support, the issue has had zero comments and no activity for over 6 years, so the original problem no longer applies to any supported release.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":12.0,"staleness":90,"complexity":20,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":2420,"labels":["id-5e73c372136ba285edff6d4d","id-5eeb87fddafe19544a50da51","verification-done-focal","verification-needed"],"created_at":"2020-01-28T08:48:14.743426+00:00","updated_at":"2020-07-16T09:48:36.807847+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":90,"complexity":20,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":15,"quick_win":12.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":28305,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1654768","title":"rust plugin doesn't check if the Cargo.toml file exists","author":"~elopio","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1654768","summary":"Rust plugin downloads the Rust toolchain before validating that Cargo.toml exists, causing a confusing late failure. Open ~10 years with zero comments; plugin now lives in craft-parts and still lacks an early existence check.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is a genuine, well-scoped bug (fail early before downloading rust when Cargo.toml is missing) but has zero comments, no labels beyond 'bitesize'/'plugin', and no maintainer response in ~10 years, so it has never been triaged. I could not confirm whether craft-parts' rust plugin now validates Cargo.toml before the rustup download (grep only shows a read-manifest check at build time), so a maintainer should verify current behavior before closing or fixing.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":22.5,"staleness":90,"complexity":25,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":3535,"labels":["bitesize","plugin"],"created_at":"2017-01-07T17:45:10.195546+00:00","updated_at":"2017-01-08T10:12:34.348695+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":90,"complexity":25,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":30,"quick_win":22.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":30041,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"2131202","title":"Opera and LossLessCut is no possible open in Wayland","author":"~maciek-borzecki","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2131202","summary":"Vague complaint about Wayland compatibility with Opera and LossLessCut snaps; requests snapd simplification for developers. No maintainer triage, 281 days inactive.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"Issue has no labels, no maintainer comments, and no assignee — it has not been assessed. The report is vague (complains about development difficulty without specific reproduction steps) and reads as a support request rather than a concrete bug. After triage, it will likely need to be closed as not_a_bug or support_request.","scores":{"impact":10,"quick_win":8.0,"staleness":90,"complexity":20,"confidence":75,"support_request":85},"age_days":303,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-11-13T10:02:33.300610+00:00","updated_at":"2025-11-27T12:31:14.034808+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":90,"complexity":20,"support_request":85,"confidence":75,"impact":10,"quick_win":8.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":28951,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1612373","title":"Numerical value for 'source-tag'  key causes confusing error","author":"~wesley-wiedenmeier","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1612373","summary":"Unquoted numeric source-tag (e.g., 2.14) in snapcraft.yaml caused a confusing 'Can't convert float to str' error. No comments, no activity for ~7.7 years. The snapcraft.internal.sources code path no longer exists after the 2.x rewrite.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has had zero comments and no activity for ~7.7 years (last activity 2814 days ago), and it targets snapcraft.internal.sources.Base, which no longer exists — the current repo layout shows the rewritten 2.x structure (snapcraft/parts, snapcraft/models) with no internal/ directory, so the original error path is gone. The only uncertainty is whether modern pydantic YAML validation still produces a confusing error for numeric tags, which I could not verify due to no pinned SHA for the repo.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":18.75,"staleness":90,"complexity":25,"confidence":70,"support_request":15},"age_days":3684,"labels":["yaml"],"created_at":"2016-08-11T18:06:30.367455+00:00","updated_at":"2018-12-18T03:08:16.322434+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":90,"complexity":25,"support_request":15,"confidence":70,"impact":25,"quick_win":18.75,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29553,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1827216","title":"local source must not specify parent directories","author":"~tejohnso","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1827216","summary":"2018 documentation request: local source paths must be within the build directory (e.g. source: ../../my-project/build fails) and the docs should say so. No labels, no comments, no maintainer activity in over 7 years.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction in 2679 days (~7.3 years), so it has never been assessed or categorised. It is a documentation clarification about working-as-intended behaviour (local source must stay within the build directory), not a pure support question, so it warrants a maintainer decision on whether the current docs already cover this. I could not inspect the repo (pinned-SHA tool errors), so I cannot confirm whether the docs were updated since 2018, which limits confidence.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":17.0,"staleness":90,"complexity":15,"confidence":50,"support_request":35},"age_days":2691,"labels":[],"created_at":"2019-05-01T14:18:35.788171+00:00","updated_at":"2019-05-01T14:18:35.788171+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":90,"complexity":15,"support_request":35,"confidence":50,"impact":20,"quick_win":17.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":30032,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"2098999","title":"Snapcraft auth does not create dir needed and errors out","author":"~kenneth-loafman","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2098999","summary":"Snapcraft auth fails to create credentials directory on macOS, causing FileNotFoundError. Issue is 560 days old with no maintainer response.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 560 days old with zero maintainer engagement. The traceback shows the `remote-build` command no longer exists in snapcraft (error: \"no such command 'remote-build'\"), and the credentials directory error originates in the external `launchpadlib` library, not snapcraft itself. The reporter also found a workaround by manually creating the directory.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":14.0,"staleness":90,"complexity":30,"confidence":60,"support_request":20},"age_days":569,"labels":["snapcraft"],"created_at":"2025-02-20T17:57:56.383928+00:00","updated_at":"2025-02-20T18:18:17.176695+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":90,"complexity":30,"support_request":20,"confidence":60,"impact":20,"quick_win":14.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":30002,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"2065230","title":"No help text for the \"help\" sub-command when in a directory containing snapcraft.yaml","author":"~brlin","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2065230","summary":"snapcraft help help command not found when in directory with snapcraft.yaml. Issue is 848 days old with no maintainer response.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"Similar issues were fixed in PR #5178 (issue #5169) and released in snapcraft 8.5.1, which addressed help command failures. This issue is 848 days old with no maintainer response or labels, and the problem is likely resolved in newer versions.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":24.0,"staleness":90,"complexity":20,"confidence":60,"support_request":10},"age_days":857,"labels":["craft-2904"],"created_at":"2024-05-08T23:10:28.379407+00:00","updated_at":"2024-05-09T12:56:50.926292+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":90,"complexity":20,"support_request":10,"confidence":60,"impact":30,"quick_win":24.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29757,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1933224","title":"Recent changes completely break 32bit snaps","author":"~ogra","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1933224","summary":"Snapcraft silently filters libraries from base snaps, breaking 32-bit multi-arch ARM snaps (build-on armhf, run-on arm64) by dropping 32-bit libs not present in the 64-bit base. Reporter requests louder warnings and an opt-out switch. No maintainer response in ~5 years.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"Zero comments and no maintainer interaction for ~5 years (last activity 1805 days ago), but the issue is a genuine bug/feature request from a core snap developer (ogra), not a support question, and the underlying concern—silent behavior changes breaking multi-arch 32-bit snaps—has no evidence of being resolved in the current codebase. It lacks labels beyond a tracking tag and shows no sign of triage, so it needs a maintainer to assess whether the base-lib filtering still drops 32-bit libs and whether an opt-out exists.","scores":{"impact":55,"quick_win":13.75,"staleness":90,"complexity":75,"confidence":55,"support_request":10},"age_days":1908,"labels":["craft-337"],"created_at":"2021-06-22T11:47:25.798762+00:00","updated_at":"2021-09-21T22:29:12.599754+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":90,"complexity":75,"support_request":10,"confidence":55,"impact":55,"quick_win":13.75,"has_related_links":false},{"id":28141,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1928046","title":"Misleading error message about lxd.migrate","author":"~mardy","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1928046","summary":"Snapcraft's LXD provider error message tells users to run lxd.migrate when the real fix is removing the transitional lxd deb package. Reported on Ubuntu 20.04; no maintainer response in ~5 years.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 1939 days old with zero comments and no maintainer interaction. The underlying problem is specific to Ubuntu 20.04's transitional lxd deb package, which is no longer a supported environment for current snapcraft versions. The error message itself originates in craft-providers (not directly inspectable here due to missing pinned SHA), but the scenario described is tied to a legacy OS release that has since reached end of standard support.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":18.75,"staleness":90,"complexity":25,"confidence":60,"support_request":15},"age_days":1951,"labels":["craft-341"],"created_at":"2021-05-11T06:33:51.012807+00:00","updated_at":"2021-07-08T12:29:47.007816+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":90,"complexity":25,"support_request":15,"confidence":60,"impact":25,"quick_win":18.75,"has_related_links":false},{"id":28928,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1604810","title":"try to snapcraft release an unexisting revision shows the wrong error","author":"~elopio","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1604810","summary":"Misleading error when running snapcraft release with a non-existent revision: it suggests 'snapcraft register' instead of saying the revision is invalid. Filed by maintainer elopio in 2016, labelled bitesize, 0 comments, no activity for ~9.5 years; the legacy CLI has since been replaced by the craft-based rewrite.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"No activity for ~9.5 years (last activity 3461 days ago, 0 comments) and the specific error string 'Sorry, try `snapcraft register ...` before trying to release or choose an existing revision' came from the legacy snapcraft CLI, which has been fully replaced by the craft-parts-based rewrite, so the reported message no longer exists in the current codebase. The companion Launchpad bug #1664704 is likewise open but dormant, confirming the old code path is abandoned rather than being worked on.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":13.5,"staleness":90,"complexity":10,"confidence":60,"support_request":5},"age_days":3706,"labels":["bitesize"],"created_at":"2016-07-20T13:11:27.405658+00:00","updated_at":"2017-03-10T22:54:50.660769+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":90,"complexity":10,"support_request":5,"confidence":60,"impact":15,"quick_win":13.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":4843,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"832","title":"docs: added download pdf button","author":"alesancor1","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/pull/832","summary":"Adds a 3-line 'download PDF' button to the docs (1 file). Open 539 days with zero comments, reviews, or CI; docs since moved to ubuntu.com publication and PDF builds are disabled in .readthedocs.yaml.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The PR has been idle for 539 days with 0 comments, 0 reviewers, and no CI, and the docs publishing pipeline has since changed: commit #1333 reconfigured docs for ubuntu.com publication and .readthedocs.yaml now has the PDF format commented out, so a 'download PDF' button targeting the old ReadTheDocs setup is likely no longer applicable. Inactivity alone isn't the basis; the disabled PDF build plus the pipeline change make it stale.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":13.5,"staleness":90,"complexity":10,"confidence":60},"age_days":551,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-03-10T15:26:59+00:00","updated_at":"2025-03-10T15:26:59+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":90,"complexity":10,"support_request":null,"confidence":60,"impact":15,"quick_win":13.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29795,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1965792","title":"source-depth should propagate to git submodules","author":"~itrue","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1965792","summary":"Feature request: source-depth should also apply --depth to git submodule update so shallow clones don't fetch full submodule history (e.g. qt5). Unlabeled, zero comments, 1624 days old; craft-parts git source still lacks depth propagation to submodules.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no assignee, and zero comments in 1624 days, showing no maintainer has ever assessed it. The underlying gap still exists in craft-parts: _update_submodules runs 'git submodule update --recursive --force' without any --depth flag, and _clone_new only passes --depth to the root clone, so the request remains valid and actionable rather than stale-irrelevant.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":27.5,"staleness":90,"complexity":45,"confidence":75,"support_request":10},"age_days":1636,"labels":[],"created_at":"2022-03-21T16:33:01.255103+00:00","updated_at":"2022-03-21T16:33:01.255103+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":90,"complexity":45,"support_request":10,"confidence":75,"impact":50,"quick_win":27.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29343,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1766878","title":"$SNAPCRAFT_PROJECT_NAME used in a remote part expands to wrong value","author":"~lucyllewy","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1766878","summary":"Bug report: $SNAPCRAFT_PROJECT_NAME in a remote part expands to the remote part's own name (e.g. alsa) instead of the consuming snap's name. Unlabelled, zero comments, no maintainer interaction, inactive ~2.3 years.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no assignee, and zero comments — no maintainer has ever acknowledged, categorised, or responded to it, so it has not been triaged. It is a genuine bug report (not a support question) with a clear, reproducible expectation about variable expansion in remote parts, so it should not be closed as not-a-bug. Its age (~844 days) and inactivity alone are not sufficient grounds to close as stale, and I could not confirm via code inspection whether remote-part variable expansion was since changed, so a human should verify current behaviour before any close decision.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":15.75,"staleness":88,"complexity":55,"confidence":55,"support_request":15},"age_days":3062,"labels":[],"created_at":"2018-04-25T13:46:50.953921+00:00","updated_at":"2024-05-10T07:22:03.509624+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":88,"complexity":55,"support_request":15,"confidence":55,"impact":35,"quick_win":15.75,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29693,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1882288","title":"ROS plugins: allow skip keys for rosdep","author":"~levi-armstrong","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1882288","summary":"Feature request to add skip keys option for rosdep in ROS plugins, allowing internal or custom dependencies not in public rosdep to be excluded. Open 6+ years with zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer engagement.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no assignee, and zero comments across 2278 days (6+ years), showing no maintainer has ever assessed or categorised it. The repo still contains extensions/ros1 and extensions/ros2 directories, so the feature request may still be relevant, but it requires a maintainer to evaluate whether the rosdep resolution code (restructured in PR #1392) would accommodate a skip-keys option or whether the use case is better handled differently.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":19.25,"staleness":88,"complexity":45,"confidence":55,"support_request":25},"age_days":2290,"labels":[],"created_at":"2020-06-05T18:02:56.823372+00:00","updated_at":"2021-06-14T12:33:13.019746+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":88,"complexity":45,"support_request":25,"confidence":55,"impact":35,"quick_win":19.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":5092,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"583","title":"support project directory with remounted path","author":"henrymao-zz","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/583","summary":"Feature request: rockcraft should support bind-mounted (remounted) paths inside the project directory, which are currently invisible during packaging because the project dir is copied into the build environment. No maintainer activity, labels, or comments in ~2.2 years.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has zero maintainer interaction, no labels, and no comments in ~810 days, so it has never been triaged or categorised. It is a legitimate feature request (bind-mounted project subdirs are dropped when the project dir is copied into the build environment), not a support question, so it should be assessed rather than closed. I could not find any commit, PR, or related issue addressing bind-mount support, so I cannot confirm it is fixed or obsolete.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":14.0,"staleness":88,"complexity":65,"confidence":55,"support_request":20},"age_days":823,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-06-12T02:10:16+00:00","updated_at":"2024-06-12T02:11:55+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":88,"complexity":65,"support_request":20,"confidence":55,"impact":40,"quick_win":14.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":28145,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1936671","title":"Crystal projects don't properly install and build due to \"pull\" copying lib/ and bin/ folders from host","author":"~koffeinfrei","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1936671","summary":"Crystal snap builds fail because 'pull' copies host lib/ and bin/ into the multipass instance, causing stale shards builds. Workaround deletes those folders on pull. 5 years old, no maintainer response, unassessed.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The report is a legitimate bug with a clear repro and workaround, but it has 0 comments, no assignee, and no maintainer assessment in ~4 years (last activity 1487 days ago), so it shows no sign of having been triaged. I could not confirm via tools whether snapcraft/plugins/v1/crystal.py still exists or still exhibits this pull-copy behavior, so closing as stale would be premature without verifying the v1 Crystal plugin is still present and affected.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":19.25,"staleness":88,"complexity":45,"confidence":52,"support_request":15},"age_days":1884,"labels":["craft-414"],"created_at":"2021-07-16T14:42:23.074015+00:00","updated_at":"2022-08-05T22:38:32.805279+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":88,"complexity":45,"support_request":15,"confidence":52,"impact":35,"quick_win":19.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":4820,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"855","title":"docs: refactor tutorial","author":"alesancor1","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/pull/855","summary":"Docs refactor moving tutorials to how-to guides and adding NGINX static HTML tutorial. 76 files changed. Review status changes_requested; maintainer said approach was 'perhaps not in this way' and to hold. Docs since reorganized separately, superseding this PR's structure.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer @cjdcordeiro stated the approach was 'perhaps not in this way' and advised holding until sprint discussion. Since then (381 days), the docs were reorganized separately: 12-factor how-to guides reorganized in #877, tutorial quadrant maintained in #1002, and numerous individual tutorial updates merged. The PR's core proposal (moving tutorials to how-to, NGINX static HTML tutorial) was not adopted, and the review remains in changes_requested with no author follow-up.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":9.8,"staleness":88,"complexity":72,"confidence":78},"age_days":524,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-04-07T07:28:55+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:12:45+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":88,"complexity":72,"support_request":null,"confidence":78,"impact":35,"quick_win":9.8,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29765,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1944982","title":"Build warns when vim is the editor","author":"~knitzsche","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1944982","summary":"Feature request: snapcraft build warns about vim swap files (.snapcraft.yaml.swp) created in the snap/ directory when editing snapcraft.yaml, asking for an exception for editor temp files. No maintainer response, no labels, 0 comments, inactive ~4.5 years.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no assignee, and zero maintainer comments in ~4.5 years, so it has never been triaged. It is a real (if minor) usability bug — vim's swap file in snap/ triggers a false 'non-snapcraft-related paths' warning in destructive mode — but the fix (whitelisting editor temp files like *.swp) is small and self-contained. I could not confirm via code search whether the warning still exists in current snapcraft (tooling returned no pinned SHA), so I am not confident enough to recommend closing as stale or fixed.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":15.0,"staleness":88,"complexity":25,"confidence":55,"support_request":30},"age_days":1814,"labels":[],"created_at":"2021-09-24T12:42:30.698699+00:00","updated_at":"2022-02-08T17:26:32.223203+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":88,"complexity":25,"support_request":30,"confidence":55,"impact":20,"quick_win":15.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":28802,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1918968","title":"Cannot automatically build a part from a Debian package source tree","author":"~racb","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1918968","summary":"Wishlist request for a snapcraft 'deb' part plugin that builds a Debian package from a source tree's debian/ directory and exposes it to stage-packages. Open since 2019 with no labels, no comments, and no maintainer response.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, zero comments, and no maintainer response in ~5.5 years, showing no sign of ever being categorised or prioritised. It is a legitimate feature request (no 'deb' part plugin exists in snapcraft's plugin set, and no related issue or PR was found in the corpus), so it should be assessed by a maintainer rather than closed as stale on inactivity alone.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":15.75,"staleness":88,"complexity":55,"confidence":65,"support_request":15},"age_days":2010,"labels":[],"created_at":"2021-03-12T18:56:12.089732+00:00","updated_at":"2021-03-18T13:15:41.642870+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":88,"complexity":55,"support_request":15,"confidence":65,"impact":35,"quick_win":15.75,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29774,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1948980","title":"User specific font configuration does not survive snap updates","author":"~gunnarhj","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1948980","summary":"User fontconfig settings in ~/.config/fontconfig are ignored by Firefox/Chromium snaps and wiped on updates due to snapd's per-revision home directory. Open ~4.8 years, no labels, no maintainer response.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, zero comments, and no assignee, showing it was never triaged or categorised. It is very old (last activity 1748 days ago), but close_stale is not justified because there is no evidence the per-revision home directory behaviour in snapd has changed, so the problem likely still applies. A maintainer needs to assess whether this belongs in snapd rather than snapcraft, since the fix would be in the snap runtime, not the build tool.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":11.25,"staleness":88,"complexity":75,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":1781,"labels":[],"created_at":"2021-10-27T19:17:30.264946+00:00","updated_at":"2021-11-17T09:35:14.201019+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":88,"complexity":75,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":45,"quick_win":11.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":15669,"project_name":"snapcraft-rocks","source":"github","external_id":"41","title":"Arguments list is incompatible with previous official snapcraft docker image","author":"VladRassokhin","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft-rocks/issues/41","summary":"Docker image entrypoint wrapper changed argument compatibility between old and new snapcraft images; requires removing 'snapcraft' from command args. 852 days old, zero comments, no labels, no maintainer interaction.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"Issue is 852 days old with zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction. The entrypoint wrapper (exec /bin/snapcraft \"$@\") is the intended design of the new image, and the workaround (removing the 'snapcraft' argument) is trivial. No evidence this was ever triaged or that the behavior has since changed, but the lack of any engagement over 2+ years and the trivial nature of the workaround make this a candidate for closure.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":26.25,"staleness":88,"complexity":25,"confidence":45,"support_request":25},"age_days":864,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-05-01T20:05:25+00:00","updated_at":"2024-05-01T20:05:25+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":88,"complexity":25,"support_request":25,"confidence":45,"impact":35,"quick_win":26.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":15612,"project_name":"snapcraft-rocks","source":"github","external_id":"98","title":"Use `rockcraft test` to test the rocks","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft-rocks/issues/98","summary":"Task to update spread.yaml and CI workflows in snapcraft-rocks to use `rockcraft test` for testing rocks. Open ~389 days with no labels, comments, or maintainer assessment; no evidence of implementation found.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no comments, and no maintainer assessment in 389 days, showing no sign of triage, so needs_triage is the appropriate default. It is not a candidate for close_stale because there is no evidence the task is obsolete (repo inspection was unavailable, so I cannot confirm whether `rockcraft test` is already used in spread.yaml or the workflows). It is a CI/test-infrastructure task rather than a support request, with modest impact.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":16.25,"staleness":88,"complexity":35,"confidence":62,"support_request":5},"age_days":401,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-08-07T14:50:41+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-07T14:50:41+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":88,"complexity":35,"support_request":5,"confidence":62,"impact":25,"quick_win":16.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":15492,"project_name":"craft-actions","source":"github","external_id":"20","title":"[Feature Request] Add `name`, `version`, `arch` and any other useful metadata as outputs of `rockcraft-pack-action`","author":"ca-scribner","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-actions/issues/20","summary":"Feature request to expose name, version, arch and other metadata as outputs of rockcraft-pack-action for easier CI chaining (e.g. skopeo copy). Unlabelled, no maintainer response, ~999 days old; still unimplemented (action only outputs rock and revisions).","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no assignee, and zero comments, showing no maintainer assessment. I verified the current rockcraft/pack/action.yaml still declares only `rock`, `rockcraft-revision`, and `lxd-revision` outputs, so the requested name/version/arch metadata is not implemented and the request remains valid rather than obsolete. Inactivity alone is not enough to close, so it needs triage rather than close_stale.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":22.75,"staleness":88,"complexity":35,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":1011,"labels":[],"created_at":"2023-12-06T19:22:34+00:00","updated_at":"2023-12-06T19:22:34+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":88,"complexity":35,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":35,"quick_win":22.75,"has_related_links":false},{"id":13568,"project_name":"craft-cli","source":"github","external_id":"172","title":"Multiprocess operations can lead to spinner deadlock","author":"cmatsuoka","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-cli/issues/172","summary":"Deadlock when a multiprocess overlay chroot subprocess writes an info message while the CLI spinner thread is active. Stub report, no labels or comments in 3 years. Referenced craft-parts PR #535 merged to mitigate by downgrading overlay logging to debug.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is a 3-year-old stub (TODO reproduction steps, no labels, zero comments) and the referenced craft-parts PR #535 was merged specifically to prevent this terminal deadlock by downgrading overlay package logging from info to debug, so the reported trigger is no longer applicable. The broader spinner/multiprocess interaction may still be worth tracking, but this issue as filed has been addressed and never developed into a reproducible report.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":13.5,"staleness":88,"complexity":70,"confidence":60,"support_request":5},"age_days":1114,"labels":[],"created_at":"2023-08-25T13:23:21+00:00","updated_at":"2023-08-25T13:23:21+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":88,"complexity":70,"support_request":5,"confidence":60,"impact":45,"quick_win":13.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":4747,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"928","title":"build(deps): use DEV craft-parts","author":"tigarmo","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/pull/928","summary":"Bumps rockcraft to a DEV craft-parts to add overlay/stage collision detection. 403 days old, 0 comments, pending review, CI failing (snap-tests, lint/files). The collision feature now ships in stable craft-parts 2.35.0, which rockcraft already pins.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"This 403-day-old, zero-comment PR pinned a DEV craft-parts solely to pull in overlay/stage collision detection. That capability has since shipped in stable craft-parts (commit b7455277 'fix(overlay): detect conflicts between overlay and install (#1190)') and rockcraft main already pins craft-parts>=2.35.0 (commit ab4f617f), so the DEV pin is no longer applicable. Failing CI (snap-tests, lint/files) plus no maintainer engagement confirm it is superseded.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":24.0,"staleness":88,"complexity":20,"confidence":72},"age_days":415,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-07-24T18:50:33+00:00","updated_at":"2025-07-24T19:53:30+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":88,"complexity":20,"support_request":null,"confidence":72,"impact":30,"quick_win":24.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":12145,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"929","title":"docs: add a preview page for reusing packages","author":"lengau","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/pull/929","summary":"Draft docs PR adding a preview page for reusing packages between builds and preparing the 5.11.0 release. Marked draft by the author on 2025-10-01; the same page was merged via #920 and shipped in 5.11.0, so the PR is superseded.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The author marked it draft on 2025-10-01 ('so we can discuss proper solutions here') with no activity since, and the exact content was already merged as #920 ('docs: add common page reuse packages between builds') and released in 5.11.0 per the changelog entry dated 2025-10-01. The PR's purpose is fully realized elsewhere, making it irrelevant beyond its age.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":13.5,"staleness":85,"complexity":10,"confidence":85},"age_days":346,"labels":["Type: Documentation"],"created_at":"2025-10-01T16:26:20+00:00","updated_at":"2025-10-01T20:36:22+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":10,"support_request":null,"confidence":85,"impact":15,"quick_win":13.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29830,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1982401","title":"snap-based programs complain about locale, permission","author":"~mardy","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1982401","summary":"Snap-based programs (Chromium, Firefox) report locale and .bashrc permission errors when executed. Issue is 1505 days old with no maintainer engagement, labels, or comments.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no maintainer comments, and no assignee, indicating it has not been triaged. Despite being 1505 days old, there's no evidence it has been resolved or is no longer relevant. The issue concerns snapd behavior when running snap packages, which may require clarification on whether this belongs in the snapcraft repository or should be redirected to snapd.","scores":{"impact":55,"quick_win":35.75,"staleness":85,"complexity":35,"confidence":65,"support_request":25},"age_days":1515,"labels":[],"created_at":"2022-07-20T16:16:15.517367+00:00","updated_at":"2022-10-03T19:26:55.393150+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":35,"support_request":25,"confidence":65,"impact":55,"quick_win":35.75,"has_related_links":false},{"id":22369,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"716","title":"Errors while installing build-snaps don't give good information","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/716","summary":"Build-snap installation errors lack details because `snap install` stderr is suppressed. Request to capture and include stderr in `SnapInstallError` for better debugging.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue lacks labels and maintainer comments (only a Jira bot response), indicating it hasn't been triaged. The bug is valid: `snaps.py` suppresses stderr during `snap install`, causing loss of diagnostic information.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":32.0,"staleness":85,"complexity":20,"confidence":85,"support_request":0},"age_days":872,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-04-23T17:43:37+00:00","updated_at":"2025-03-11T14:28:32+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":20,"support_request":0,"confidence":85,"impact":40,"quick_win":32.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":1714,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2423","title":"Fix the CI for 2.7","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/2423","summary":"Maintainer task to fix CI on the 2.7 branch to enable backporting bugfixes from PR #2422. Triaged but inactive for 381 days; the 2.7.3 hotfix was merged to main (#1903) and the project has advanced to v4.x, making the 2.7 branch CI fix no longer applicable.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue's purpose was to fix CI on the 2.7 branch to backport bugfixes from PR #2422 (merged). The 2.7.3 hotfix was subsequently merged to main via #1903, and the project has advanced to v4.x with active hotfix branches for 4.3.1/4.2.2. No maintainer activity in 381 days, and the 2.7 release cycle appears complete, making this branch-specific CI task no longer relevant.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":16.0,"staleness":85,"complexity":20,"confidence":72,"support_request":0},"age_days":393,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Cleanup"],"created_at":"2025-08-15T19:18:43+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T19:19:20+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":20,"support_request":0,"confidence":72,"impact":20,"quick_win":16.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":46474,"project_name":"fetch-service","source":"github","external_id":"209","title":"Implement configurable request authentication","author":"cmatsuoka","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/fetch-service/issues/209","summary":"Feature request to allow controller to set credentials for specific URL patterns in the Fetch Service. Unlabeled, no maintainer response, 389 days since last activity.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no assignee, and no maintainer response — only an auto-generated Jira sync comment. Despite being from a maintainer (cmatsuoka) and being 730 days old, it has never been triaged or prioritized by the team.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"staleness":85,"complexity":40,"confidence":65,"support_request":10},"age_days":733,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-09-09T13:12:50+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:15:48+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":65,"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29993,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"2059717","title":"please allow omitting source for the dump plugin","author":"~ogra","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2059717","summary":"Feature request to make source optional for the dump plugin, similar to the nil plugin. Untriaged, 889 days old, no maintainer response.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no maintainer comments, and no assignee after 889 days. While the request is still valid (dump_plugin.py still requires source: str), it needs maintainer assessment to determine if this feature is still desired. The dump plugin's source field is defined as `source: str` (required) in craft-parts, unlike the nil plugin which has no source field.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":28.0,"staleness":85,"complexity":30,"confidence":60,"support_request":20},"age_days":898,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-03-28T16:24:26.725300+00:00","updated_at":"2024-04-12T01:20:42.398840+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":30,"support_request":20,"confidence":60,"impact":40,"quick_win":28.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29995,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"2060269","title":"arch list not recognized by launchpad builder","author":"~bryce","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2060269","summary":"Snapcraft architecture list format not recognized by Launchpad builder; only amd64 builds with simple list syntax, requires explicit build-on format","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has been inactive for 882 days with no maintainer engagement, labels, or comments. The reported behavior may have changed in newer versions of snapcraft, and a workaround (using explicit build-on format) exists. This is a documentation/UX improvement rather than a critical bug, and after 2+ years of inactivity it is no longer relevant to current versions.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":18.75,"staleness":85,"complexity":25,"confidence":55,"support_request":15},"age_days":891,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-04-05T05:43:37.543836+00:00","updated_at":"2024-04-05T05:43:37.543836+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":25,"support_request":15,"confidence":55,"impact":25,"quick_win":18.75,"has_related_links":false},{"id":40767,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2779","title":"[2.7] Hotfix dependency updates","author":"lengau","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/pull/2779","summary":"Hotfix branch for Charmcraft 2.7 dependency updates to fix CI breakages; inactive for 53 days with 0 reviewers and some failing CI tests.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The PR has been inactive for 53 days with no reviewer engagement or comments. A similar dependency update for Charmcraft 2.7 was implemented in merged PR #2122, making this PR redundant and no longer applicable.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":26.25,"staleness":85,"complexity":25,"confidence":75},"age_days":64,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-07-11T01:48:17+00:00","updated_at":"2026-07-13T21:27:11+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":25,"support_request":null,"confidence":75,"impact":35,"quick_win":26.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":30001,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"2065075","title":"snapcraft register-key timeout","author":"~elvintech","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2065075","summary":"snapcraft register-key fails with GPG timeout error; issue is 849 days old with no maintainer engagement","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 849 days old with zero maintainer engagement or comments. The GPG signing timeout error is likely a user-specific configuration issue (GPG agent not responding, network problems, or keyring issues) rather than a snapcraft bug. After 2+ years with no follow-up, there is no evidence the problem persists or is reproducible.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":85,"complexity":40,"confidence":60,"support_request":60},"age_days":858,"labels":["craft-2880"],"created_at":"2024-05-07T15:44:29.754505+00:00","updated_at":"2024-05-07T20:20:20.508755+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":40,"support_request":60,"confidence":60,"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29330,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1759740","title":"Library discovery for rpath patching needs to be deterministic","author":"~kyrofa","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1759740","summary":"Snapcraft's rpath patcher may pick the wrong of several same-named libraries in a snap because its directory walk is nondeterministic and doesn't follow ld.so search order. Filed by a maintainer ~8.4 years ago; no labels, comments, or activity since.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 3078 days old with zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer acknowledgement, so it has never been triaged. It is a genuine correctness bug (nondeterministic library matching during rpath patching can link executables against the wrong libfoo version), but I could not verify via tools whether the current snapcraft/elf patcher already implements ld.so-style search ordering, so a maintainer should confirm whether it still reproduces before closing or scheduling a fix.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":22.5,"staleness":85,"complexity":55,"confidence":55,"support_request":5},"age_days":3090,"labels":[],"created_at":"2018-03-29T02:21:52.568725+00:00","updated_at":"2018-03-29T02:21:52.568725+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":55,"support_request":5,"confidence":55,"impact":50,"quick_win":22.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":46476,"project_name":"fetch-service","source":"github","external_id":"202","title":"Add snapcraft tests","author":"cmatsuoka","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/fetch-service/issues/202","summary":"Feature request to add snapcraft tests for the fetch service snap package using the proposed test framework. Issue is 744 days old with no maintainer engagement beyond an auto-generated Jira sync.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has been inactive for 744 days with no maintainer engagement beyond an auto-generated Jira sync message (CRAFT-3303). The task of adding snapcraft tests may no longer be relevant or may have been addressed through other means, and the referenced internal ticket status is unknown.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":30.0,"staleness":85,"complexity":25,"confidence":65,"support_request":15},"age_days":747,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-08-26T15:29:05+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:15:48+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":25,"support_request":15,"confidence":65,"impact":40,"quick_win":30.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":46482,"project_name":"fetch-service","source":"github","external_id":"225","title":"Add GitHub workflow that builds and tests the fetch-operator charm","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/fetch-service/issues/225","summary":"Feature request to add GitHub workflow for building and testing the fetch-operator charm using charmcraft test. Issue is 715 days old with no maintainer engagement or labels.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 715 days old with no maintainer labels, no assignee, and only an auto-generated Jira sync comment. The requested work (adding CI workflow to the fetch-operator repository) appears to have never been completed, and there is no evidence of maintainer engagement or relevance to the current project state after over a year of inactivity.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":28.0,"staleness":85,"complexity":30,"confidence":65,"support_request":20},"age_days":719,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-09-23T15:20:45+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:15:46+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":30,"support_request":20,"confidence":65,"impact":40,"quick_win":28.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":21853,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1232","title":"ant plugin: Support `disable-parallel` parameter","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/1232","summary":"Feature request to add the disable-parallel part property to the ant plugin. Labeled 'Needs information' and waiting ~1 year for a real-world use case; maintainer explicitly called it extremely low priority until one is provided.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue body itself states this is 'extremely low priority until someone shows us a real-world use case' and the 'Status: Needs information' label confirms the maintainer is waiting for that use case, yet 363 days have passed with 0 comments and no use case provided — well beyond the 6-month threshold. The ant plugin still lacks the property (only autotools supports it), so it is unfixed but no longer actionable without external input.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":12.0,"staleness":85,"complexity":20,"confidence":82,"support_request":10},"age_days":375,"labels":["Status: Needs information"],"created_at":"2025-09-02T15:22:15+00:00","updated_at":"2025-09-02T15:22:15+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":20,"support_request":10,"confidence":82,"impact":15,"quick_win":12.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29989,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"2053119","title":"Pulling from private repository with passphrase protected key fails","author":"~gbeuzeboc","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2053119","summary":"snapcraft --bind-ssh fails to prompt for passphrase when using passphrase-protected SSH keys to clone private repositories. Untriaged, no maintainer response after 933 days.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no maintainer comments, and no assignee after 933 days. It reports a legitimate bug where SSH passphrase prompts don't appear when using --bind-ssh with passphrase-protected keys, but requires maintainer assessment to determine if it's still relevant or has been addressed in newer versions.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":20.0,"staleness":85,"complexity":50,"confidence":50,"support_request":10},"age_days":942,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-02-14T09:23:53.079782+00:00","updated_at":"2024-02-14T09:23:53.079782+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":50,"support_request":10,"confidence":50,"impact":40,"quick_win":20.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":30014,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"2075493","title":"`plugin: meson` no longer functional for Rust on `base:` < `core22` \"Could not find an implementation of tomllib, nor toml2json\"","author":"~saviq","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2075493","summary":"Meson plugin fails on base < core22 due to Meson 1.5.0 requiring tomllib for Cargo.toml parsing. Unlabelled, no maintainer response, inactive for 707 days.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 764 days old with 707 days of inactivity and no maintainer engagement. It affects base: core20 which is likely EOL, making the issue irrelevant for current supported bases. The reporter provided workarounds (installing tomli or pinning meson-version), further reducing urgency.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":85,"complexity":40,"confidence":55,"support_request":15},"age_days":773,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-08-01T07:33:30.817939+00:00","updated_at":"2024-09-26T19:19:11.464491+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":40,"support_request":15,"confidence":55,"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":7469,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"4408","title":"Snapcraft 7 fails with inline deb822 signing blocks","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/4408","summary":"Snapcraft 7 core20 LXD builds fail on hosts with modern apt deb822 Signed-By blocks due to a legacy apt package check in snapcraft_legacy. Triaged; root cause identified, but snapcraft_legacy and core20 have since been removed from the codebase.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue was triaged and maintainer mr-cal identified the root cause as a legacy apt check in snapcraft_legacy/internal/build_providers/_lxd/_lxd.py#L90. However, snapcraft_legacy has since been removed (commit ffb164b7a 'chore: remove snapcraft_legacy') and core20 support dropped (commit fa7952b4d 'chore!: drop core20 (#6019)'), so the problematic code path no longer exists and the bug is no longer reproducible in the current codebase.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":26.25,"staleness":85,"complexity":25,"confidence":85,"support_request":10},"age_days":1060,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Bug"],"created_at":"2023-10-18T16:58:43+00:00","updated_at":"2025-04-28T14:45:12+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":25,"support_request":10,"confidence":85,"impact":35,"quick_win":26.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":46487,"project_name":"fetch-service","source":"github","external_id":"447","title":"test: reproducer for security/archive.ubuntu issue","author":"tigarmo","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/fetch-service/pull/447","summary":"Test reproducer for a security/archive.ubuntu issue, inactive for over a year with no maintainer engagement or follow-up.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The PR has been inactive for 383 days with zero comments, zero reviewers, and no maintainer engagement. As a test reproducer for a security/archive.ubuntu issue that hasn't been integrated or addressed, and with no evidence that the underlying issue still requires this test, it is no longer actionable.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":24.0,"staleness":85,"complexity":20,"confidence":55},"age_days":387,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-08-21T21:33:15+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-22T12:15:05+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":20,"support_request":null,"confidence":55,"impact":30,"quick_win":24.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29302,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1748236","title":"color escape codes are left open","author":"~xordspar0","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1748236","summary":"Snapcraft's snapping progress spinner emits a green ANSI color code without a matching reset, so interrupting the build leaves the terminal green. Open since 2017 with zero comments; spinner logic now lives in the craft-cli dependency, so current behavior is unverified.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"Zero comments, no labels beyond 'ui', and no maintainer interaction in ~8.5 years (last activity 3084 days ago), so it has never been triaged. The spinner code has since moved to the craft-cli dependency (AGENTS.md maps 'Terminal output, progress reporting' to craft-cli), so a maintainer needs to verify whether the reset code is still missing before closing or fixing. A related report (#1692754, 'snapcraft turns the console text green') was closed as abandoned, but this one is distinct (interrupt during snapping vs. after completion).","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":15.0,"staleness":85,"complexity":25,"confidence":55,"support_request":5},"age_days":3138,"labels":["ui"],"created_at":"2018-02-08T16:50:45.144255+00:00","updated_at":"2018-03-22T16:56:56.724259+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":25,"support_request":5,"confidence":55,"impact":20,"quick_win":15.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":30026,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"2089796","title":"\"snapcraft list-keys\" fails on macOS 15.1.1 (24B91)","author":"~pbadams","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2089796","summary":"snapcraft list-keys fails on macOS 15.1.1 with /proc/self/fd/0 error. Issue is 645 days old with no maintainer response or labels.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"No maintainer has responded or labeled this issue in 645 days. The bug is legitimate (macOS lacks /proc/self/fd/0 which the snap CLI depends on), but requires triage to confirm reproducibility and determine if it's still relevant to current versions.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"staleness":85,"complexity":40,"confidence":60,"support_request":10},"age_days":654,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-11-27T21:22:18.767037+00:00","updated_at":"2024-11-27T21:22:18.767037+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":60,"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":5062,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"613","title":"some commands, like clean, should not need schema validation","author":"cjdcordeiro","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/613","summary":"Rockcraft clean command requires full rockcraft.yaml schema validation, preventing cleanup when the config contains unsupported fields. Maintainer acknowledged the issue but noted name/platforms/base are needed to identify instances to clean. No fix implemented; issue inactive for ~2 years.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue was acknowledged by a maintainer (tigarmo) who agreed in principle but clarified that name, platforms, and base fields are required to identify which instances to clean, meaning the original example was flawed. The author agreed and updated the description. However, no fix has been implemented and the issue has been inactive for ~797 days. The clean command is now provided by craft-application upstream, so any fix would need to happen there. The issue remains a valid UX concern (clean should work with minimal valid config) but is low priority given the 2-year inactivity and the complexity of relaxing validation while preserving instance identification.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":21.0,"staleness":85,"complexity":40,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":809,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-06-25T10:50:20+00:00","updated_at":"2024-06-25T11:38:21+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":35,"quick_win":21.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":7273,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"4604","title":"Reverse the priority for how version/grade are set for `base: core20` snaps","author":"dilyn-corner","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/4604","summary":"Feature request to reverse version/grade precedence for adopt-info on base: core20 snaps so part-provided values override YAML. Triaged as enhancement; maintainer said unlikely to be done before core20 is dropped, and core20 support has since been removed from the codebase.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The maintainer (mr-cal, 2025-05-27) explicitly said this is 'unlikely to be prioritized and completed before core20 is dropped in a major Snapcraft release.' Repo evidence confirms core20 has since been dropped (commit fa7952b4d 'chore!: drop core20 (#6019)') and snapcraft_legacy removed (ffb164b7a), so the core20-specific behavior this enhancement targets no longer exists in the codebase. The issue is no longer applicable.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":13.75,"staleness":85,"complexity":45,"confidence":80,"support_request":10},"age_days":933,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2024-02-22T17:46:57+00:00","updated_at":"2025-05-28T13:23:38+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":45,"support_request":10,"confidence":80,"impact":25,"quick_win":13.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":30037,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"2104274","title":"Snapcraft has unclear behavior when providing same build-snap from different channels","author":"~nteodosio","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2104274","summary":"Bug report: snapcraft resolves build-snap from wrong channel (stable vs candidate). Untriaged, no maintainer response in 527 days.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"This is a legitimate bug report with concrete evidence (build logs showing wrong revision path /23/ instead of expected candidate channel revision), but it has zero maintainer engagement, no labels, and no assignee after 527 days. The issue hasn't been triaged — a maintainer needs to assess whether the bug still exists in current snapcraft versions before deciding to keep it open or close it.","scores":{"impact":60,"quick_win":33.0,"staleness":85,"complexity":45,"confidence":55,"support_request":15},"age_days":535,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-03-26T15:35:16.644976+00:00","updated_at":"2025-03-27T08:24:17.259591+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":45,"support_request":15,"confidence":55,"impact":60,"quick_win":33.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":40768,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2780","title":"chore(hotfix): track 3.5 CI fixes","author":"lengau","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/pull/2780","summary":"Draft tracking PR for hotfix/3.5 CI fixes with empty initial commit; no follow-up commits or reviewer engagement in 53 days","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"This is a draft tracking PR created 56 days ago with no follow-up commits despite the body stating 'follow-up commits will address CI failures.' It has had zero comments, zero reviewers, and no activity for 53 days. As a tracking PR with no substantive changes or follow-through, it is no longer relevant.","scores":{"impact":10,"quick_win":8.5,"staleness":85,"complexity":15,"confidence":75},"age_days":64,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-07-11T01:58:41+00:00","updated_at":"2026-07-14T11:42:37+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":15,"support_request":null,"confidence":75,"impact":10,"quick_win":8.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":39851,"project_name":"craft-providers","source":"github","external_id":"824","title":"feat: add a `get_base` factory function","author":"lengau","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-providers/pull/824","summary":"Adds a `get_base` factory function to craft-providers. PR is 359 days old with 0 comments, 0 reviewers, and no activity.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The PR has been inactive for 359 days with 0 comments and 0 reviewers, but there is no evidence it was explicitly rejected or that the feature was implemented elsewhere. The `get_base` function does not currently exist in the codebase, so the feature request may still be valid. However, the lack of maintainer engagement after nearly a year suggests it may need re-evaluation or re-submission.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":33.75,"staleness":85,"complexity":25,"confidence":55},"age_days":367,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-09-10T23:29:44+00:00","updated_at":"2025-09-10T23:29:44+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":25,"support_request":null,"confidence":55,"impact":45,"quick_win":33.75,"has_related_links":false},{"id":5936,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"5981","title":"chore: use pathlib to interact with craft-parts","author":"EdmilsonRodrigues","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/pull/5981","summary":"Adapts craft-parts API calls to use pathlib after upstream craft-parts#1424 (2.33 release). 217 days old, 0 comments, 0 reviewers, 4 unresolved review comments, several CI checks failing. Main already requires craft-parts>=2.33.0.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The PR is 217 days old with zero maintainer engagement (0 comments, 0 reviewers) and 4 unresolved review comments. Main already pins craft-parts>=2.33.0 (the version containing the pathlib API change from craft-parts#1424), meaning the codebase has already been adapted to the new API through other commits. The change is a small mechanical refactor (+23/-21 across 4 files) that is no longer applicable to the current codebase state.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":22.5,"staleness":85,"complexity":25,"confidence":55},"age_days":229,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-01-26T14:31:15+00:00","updated_at":"2026-01-26T15:32:52+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":25,"support_request":null,"confidence":55,"impact":30,"quick_win":22.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":40737,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2772","title":"Work/charmcraft 710 prototype e2e","author":"lengau","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/pull/2772","summary":"Prototype e2e changes for charmcraft issue #710. Inactive 56 days, no reviewers, no comments. Related craft-parts PR #1635 was closed by the author who abandoned this approach.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The author closed craft-parts#1635 (same title) stating they 'decided to implement relative parent paths instead of the proposed end-to-end prototype' and abandoned the changes. This charmcraft PR appears to be the same abandoned work with no maintainer engagement or activity for 56 days.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":85,"complexity":40,"confidence":75},"age_days":64,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-07-10T18:43:34+00:00","updated_at":"2026-07-10T20:11:43+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":40,"support_request":null,"confidence":75,"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":4917,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"758","title":"remove chisel part from Rockcraft's snap","author":"linostar","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/pull/758","summary":"Removes the chisel part from Rockcraft's snap definition (13 files, +50/-17). Depends on craft-parts#904 (now merged). PR is 649 days old with no reviews, comments, or CI; chisel part still present in current snap/snapcraft.yaml.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"The blocking dependency craft-parts#904 is now merged, and the chisel part still exists in snap/snapcraft.yaml, so the goal remains valid. However, the PR is 649 days old with zero reviews, comments, or CI, and the snap build system has been substantially reworked since (uv plugin, starbase, rustc), so a maintainer must assess whether the 13-file diff can be rebased or the change should be redone.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":19.5,"staleness":85,"complexity":35,"confidence":72},"age_days":662,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-11-20T09:54:30+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:12:55+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":35,"support_request":null,"confidence":72,"impact":30,"quick_win":19.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":4866,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"809","title":"fix: update plugin build error message","author":"cmatsuoka","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/pull/809","summary":"Updates craft-parts to obtain combined output on plugin build errors for better failure diagnostics. 567 days old, 2 comments, no CI, pending review; author noted test flakiness and non-reproducibility.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The PR is 567 days old with no activity since 2025-02-11 and no CI. The related work snapcraft#5249 was closed as superseded after upstream craft-parts released the combined-output fix, and rockcraft now pins craft-parts>=2.35.0 (commit ab4f617f), so the dependency bump this PR sought is already incorporated. The author's own comments flag test flakiness and non-reproducibility, so the change is no longer applicable as-is.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":25.5,"staleness":85,"complexity":15,"confidence":70},"age_days":579,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-02-10T12:54:10+00:00","updated_at":"2025-02-11T17:19:53+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":15,"support_request":null,"confidence":70,"impact":30,"quick_win":25.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":5496,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"178","title":"`rockcraft` crashes at the `update apt cache` step","author":"gruyaume","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/178","summary":"Rockcraft fails at 'update apt cache' on GitHub ubuntu-22.04 runners due to Docker iptables rules blocking LXD container networking. Maintainers identified the root cause and pointed to canonical/setup-lxd or rockcraft-pack actions as the fix. Reporter acknowledged the solution in Jan 2023. No labels, no activity since.","suggested_action":"close_not_a_bug","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer @jnsgruk identified the root cause as an iptables clash on 22.04 GitHub runners where Docker's rules block LXD container networking, and provided the fix (use canonical/setup-lxd or rockcraft-pack action). The reporter confirmed understanding ('Ahhh ok that's good to know. Cheers!'). This is an environment configuration issue, not a rockcraft bug — the apt cache failure is correctly reported by craft-providers. The documentation has since been updated with a warning about the LXD/Docker connectivity issue (docs/reuse/tutorial/setup_stable.rst, release notes 1.17), and the affected version (0.0.1.dev1) is long superseded by 1.x releases.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":12.75,"staleness":85,"complexity":15,"confidence":82,"support_request":80},"age_days":1334,"labels":[],"created_at":"2023-01-17T16:29:19+00:00","updated_at":"2023-01-31T10:36:35+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":15,"support_request":80,"confidence":82,"impact":15,"quick_win":12.75,"has_related_links":false},{"id":5020,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"655","title":"Make ROCK base image registry configurable.","author":"aznashwan","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/655","summary":"Feature request to make the hardcoded ECR base image registry URL configurable in rockcraft.oci.Image to allow pulling from non-ECR registries and avoid rate-limit failures. Untriaged, no maintainer response, no labels, 763 days old. Code still uses hardcoded REGISTRY_URL = ECR_URL.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no assignee, and no maintainer response in 763 days. The code at rockcraft/oci.py:46 still hardcodes REGISTRY_URL = ECR_URL with no configurable alternative, confirming the feature was never implemented. The author's comment references issue #654 as related-in-cause but functionally independent, and no maintainer has acknowledged or prioritized either.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":24.75,"staleness":85,"complexity":45,"confidence":80,"support_request":20},"age_days":775,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-07-29T11:35:12+00:00","updated_at":"2024-07-29T11:36:04+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":45,"support_request":20,"confidence":80,"impact":45,"quick_win":24.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":39829,"project_name":"craft-providers","source":"github","external_id":"714","title":"craft-providers error: Timed out waiting for networking to be ready.","author":"nteodosio","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-providers/issues/714","summary":"craft-providers times out waiting for networking in LXD container during snap builds. Open 602 days with no maintainer response, labels, or comments.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no maintainer response, labels, or comments after 602 days, indicating it hasn't been triaged. The networking timeout error in `_setup_wait_for_network` is still present in the codebase, suggesting the issue may still be valid and requires maintainer assessment.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"staleness":85,"complexity":40,"confidence":60,"support_request":20},"age_days":610,"labels":["Type: Bug"],"created_at":"2025-01-10T11:48:59+00:00","updated_at":"2026-04-22T02:47:49+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":40,"support_request":20,"confidence":60,"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":39827,"project_name":"craft-providers","source":"github","external_id":"498","title":"core24 lxd image intermittenly fails to launch","author":"mr-cal","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-providers/issues/498","summary":"core24 LXD image intermittently fails to launch due to cloud image server issues; escalated to Canonical's cloud image team but unresolved after 31 months","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"This is an external infrastructure issue with Canonical's cloud image servers, not a craft-providers bug. The maintainer escalated it to the cloud image team (rt.admin.canonical.com/Ticket/Display.html?id=161719) and noted a retry workaround exists. After 962 days open with 136 days since last activity and no resolution from the external team, the issue is effectively stale and out of craft-providers' control.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":33.75,"staleness":85,"complexity":25,"confidence":75,"support_request":15},"age_days":970,"labels":["Type: Bug"],"created_at":"2024-01-16T20:54:18+00:00","updated_at":"2026-04-22T02:47:52+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":25,"support_request":15,"confidence":75,"impact":45,"quick_win":33.75,"has_related_links":false},{"id":4737,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"938","title":"ci: add arm64 snap build","author":"cjdcordeiro","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/pull/938","summary":"Adds arm64 to snap build CI on a feature branch. 375 days old, no activity, multiple CI failures. arm64 platform is already present in main's snap/snapcraft.yaml, suggesting the goal was achieved elsewhere.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The PR is 375 days old with zero comments or review activity, and its stated goal (adding arm64 snap build) is already reflected in main's snap/snapcraft.yaml which lists arm64 under platforms. Multiple CI checks are failing (snap-tests, OSV-scanner, Fast/Slow tests on jammy and noble, lint/files), and the PR targeted a feature branch that has likely been superseded by the current main branch which already includes arm64 support.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":17.0,"staleness":85,"complexity":15,"confidence":72},"age_days":388,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-08-21T06:45:59+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-21T08:02:08+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":15,"support_request":null,"confidence":72,"impact":20,"quick_win":17.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29939,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"2013242","title":"Do not allow two different apps to have the same autostart-desktop file","author":"~3v1n0","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2013242","summary":"Feature request for snapcraft to validate that autostart desktop files have unique desktop IDs across different apps, preventing snapd from launching the wrong application.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no maintainer comments, no assignee, and has been inactive for 1254 days. It describes a real validation gap where snapd could launch the wrong application when multiple apps share the same desktop-id. A maintainer needs to assess whether this validation is still relevant and whether it was implemented elsewhere or addressed in snapd itself.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"staleness":85,"complexity":40,"confidence":40,"support_request":20},"age_days":1263,"labels":[],"created_at":"2023-03-29T19:26:58.437288+00:00","updated_at":"2023-03-29T19:30:41.766234+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":40,"support_request":20,"confidence":40,"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29936,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"2012504","title":"PATH auto extended with stage paths","author":"~ondrak","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2012504","summary":"Issue about snapcraft auto-extending PATH with stage paths causing cross-build failures. Untriaged, 1261 days old, no comments or labels.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer engagement after 1261 days. The concern about stage paths in PATH breaking cross builds is a legitimate architectural question, and the current craft-parts code (craft_parts/executor/environment.py) still collects bin_paths from stage_dir and adds them to PATH. However, without maintainer input, it's unclear if this is still relevant or has been addressed elsewhere.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":22.5,"staleness":85,"complexity":55,"confidence":60,"support_request":20},"age_days":1270,"labels":[],"created_at":"2023-03-22T11:30:48.778510+00:00","updated_at":"2023-04-17T20:06:18.344922+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":55,"support_request":20,"confidence":60,"impact":50,"quick_win":22.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":30045,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"2138729","title":"[Not a Bug] Need info for xvfb / headless-display access","author":"~t-a-k","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2138729","summary":"User requesting help configuring xvfb for headless snap deployment; explicitly labeled as not a bug by author; no maintainer engagement after 227 days.","suggested_action":"close_not_a_bug","suggested_action_reason":"The issue title explicitly states '[Not a Bug]' and the author confirms 'This is not a bug' in the body — it is a support request for help configuring xvfb in a snap. Combined with 227 days of inactivity and no maintainer engagement, this qualifies as a support/usage question rather than a bug report.","scores":{"impact":10,"quick_win":8.5,"staleness":85,"complexity":15,"confidence":85,"support_request":95},"age_days":235,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-01-20T12:59:12.525626+00:00","updated_at":"2026-01-20T12:59:12.525626+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":15,"support_request":95,"confidence":85,"impact":10,"quick_win":8.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29930,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"2011842","title":"Incorrect default LD_LIBRARY_PATH","author":"~saviq","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2011842","summary":"Bug report about snapcraft not properly handling shell expansion in environment variables like ${LD_LIBRARY_PATH:-Foo}","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"Issue is 1267 days old with zero maintainer response, no labels, and no assignee. It describes a legitimate bug with clear reproduction steps showing that shell expansion syntax in environment variables isn't being properly handled. However, without maintainer assessment, it cannot be categorized or prioritized yet.","scores":{"impact":60,"quick_win":36.0,"staleness":85,"complexity":40,"confidence":50,"support_request":10},"age_days":1276,"labels":[],"created_at":"2023-03-16T15:41:59.074441+00:00","updated_at":"2023-05-31T15:30:01.779837+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":50,"impact":60,"quick_win":36.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29285,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1744608","title":"customize snapcraft environment  based on architecture.","author":"~bsutton","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1744608","summary":"Feature request to support architecture-conditional (on/else) syntax in the apps environment key, currently limited to stage-packages. Open since 2019 with no comments or maintainer response; grammar support has since expanded to more part keywords but app environment remains unaddressed.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is a well-scoped feature request (grammar/on-else for app environment variables) with zero comments, no labels beyond topic tags, and no maintainer interaction in ~8.5 years, so it has never been triaged. Grammar support has since been extended to more part keywords (e.g. build-environment, build-snaps) per commit history, but the apps.environment key is not in the grammar-processed keys list (snapcraft/parts/grammar.py _KEYS), so the request remains unimplemented and worth a maintainer decision.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":85,"complexity":55,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":3156,"labels":["architecture","environment","snapcraft"],"created_at":"2018-01-21T23:30:12.255357+00:00","updated_at":"2018-01-22T23:21:24.887296+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":55,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":40,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29920,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"2007790","title":"core22: Only amd64 snap is built when multiple architectures are specified","author":"~brlin","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2007790","summary":"Untriaged report that specifying multiple architectures in snapcraft.yaml only triggers amd64 builds in the Snapcraft build service.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, comments, or maintainer engagement after ~3.5 years, indicating it has not been triaged. It clearly describes a multi-architecture build failure, but requires maintainer assessment to verify if it's still reproducible on current bases or has been addressed elsewhere.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"staleness":85,"complexity":40,"confidence":60,"support_request":10},"age_days":1301,"labels":[],"created_at":"2023-02-19T22:43:37.602357+00:00","updated_at":"2023-05-09T15:00:32.212418+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":60,"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29918,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"2007480","title":"The 'url' of 'package-repositories' can't handle PPA token from the environment variable","author":"~laiderlai","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2007480","summary":"Feature request: snapcraft should expand environment variables in package-repositories URL fields to avoid embedding sensitive PPA tokens in snapcraft.yaml","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no maintainer response, no assignee, and 0 comments after 1295 days. While the security concern about embedding PPA tokens in YAML files is valid, the issue has not been triaged or acknowledged by maintainers. The age of the issue (3.5 years) and the lack of engagement create uncertainty about whether this feature is still desired or relevant in current snapcraft versions.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":32.5,"staleness":85,"complexity":35,"confidence":55,"support_request":15},"age_days":1305,"labels":[],"created_at":"2023-02-16T05:10:32.913180+00:00","updated_at":"2023-02-16T05:10:32.913180+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":35,"support_request":15,"confidence":55,"impact":50,"quick_win":32.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29911,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"2004072","title":"No option \"--add-ca-certificates\"","author":"~rinrin-ne","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2004072","summary":"Documented --add-ca-certificates CLI option missing since snapcraft 7.0; no maintainer response in 3.5 years","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue reports a documented option that has been missing since version 7.0, but has zero maintainer engagement, no labels, and no assignee after 3.5 years. It needs triage to determine whether the option was intentionally removed, the documentation is outdated, or the feature is still relevant to current versions.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":28.0,"staleness":85,"complexity":30,"confidence":50,"support_request":20},"age_days":1323,"labels":[],"created_at":"2023-01-28T11:43:26.383674+00:00","updated_at":"2024-12-28T16:29:51.676022+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":30,"support_request":20,"confidence":50,"impact":40,"quick_win":28.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":39852,"project_name":"craft-providers","source":"github","external_id":"817","title":"ci: enable macos for multipass tests","author":"lengau","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-providers/pull/817","summary":"Enables macOS CI for multipass tests. PR has been inactive for ~1 year with no maintainer engagement and failing CI checks.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The PR has been inactive for 359 days with zero maintainer comments or reviewer engagement. The PR body itself states 'We should speed them up before merging,' indicating the author acknowledged it was not ready. Combined with failing CI checks and a year of no activity, the PR is no longer actionable.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":21.25,"staleness":85,"complexity":15,"confidence":70},"age_days":373,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-09-04T23:53:58+00:00","updated_at":"2025-09-10T21:49:43+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":15,"support_request":null,"confidence":70,"impact":25,"quick_win":21.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":5243,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"432","title":"improve the speed rockcraft's iterative design experience","author":"ca-scribner","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/432","summary":"Feature request to improve rockcraft pack build speed and caching for iterative development. Untriaged, no maintainer comments, inactive for over a year.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no maintainer comments, and no assignee after 1004 days. While the repo has evolved significantly (craft-application 5, overlay features, OCI image caching service), no specific PR or commit addresses this caching/speed improvement request. The feature remains relevant as iterative development speed is a core UX concern.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":20.0,"staleness":85,"complexity":60,"confidence":75,"support_request":10},"age_days":1016,"labels":[],"created_at":"2023-12-01T21:22:38+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:12:52+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":60,"support_request":10,"confidence":75,"impact":50,"quick_win":20.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":39819,"project_name":"craft-providers","source":"github","external_id":"262","title":"Module import order matters, but shouldn't.","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-providers/issues/262","summary":"Circular import between snap_installer and bases modules has been resolved through code refactoring.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The circular import issue is no longer reproducible. Code inspection shows instance_config was moved out of the bases package (now at craft_providers/instance_config.py instead of craft_providers/bases/instance_config.py), and snap_installer imports in centos.py are guarded by TYPE_CHECKING blocks, breaking the runtime circular dependency.","scores":{"impact":65,"quick_win":35.75,"staleness":85,"complexity":45,"confidence":75,"support_request":5},"age_days":1228,"labels":["Type: Bug"],"created_at":"2023-05-03T11:24:23+00:00","updated_at":"2026-04-22T02:48:02+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":45,"support_request":5,"confidence":75,"impact":65,"quick_win":35.75,"has_related_links":false},{"id":39754,"project_name":"craft-platforms","source":"github","external_id":"79","title":"Unify charm build planner with default build planner","author":"mr-cal","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-platforms/issues/79","summary":"Enhancement to consolidate charm build planner with default build planner to reduce duplication. Open 634 days with no maintainer response or activity.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"Issue has been inactive for 634 days with zero comments and no maintainer engagement. As an enhancement from a maintainer, it was likely deprioritized or superseded by other work. Without evidence of ongoing relevance or implementation elsewhere, the prolonged inactivity suggests it is no longer a current priority.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":22.0,"staleness":85,"complexity":45,"confidence":35,"support_request":10},"age_days":642,"labels":["Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2024-12-09T18:53:28+00:00","updated_at":"2024-12-09T18:53:28+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":45,"support_request":10,"confidence":35,"impact":40,"quick_win":22.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29908,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"2002474","title":"Snapcraft does not take the environment variables into account during build","author":"~snorbi","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2002474","summary":"Environment variables in snapcraft command field not expanded during build, causing pack failure","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no maintainer response, and no assignee after 1331 days. A maintainer should assess whether this environment variable expansion issue is still relevant to current snapcraft versions.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"staleness":85,"complexity":40,"confidence":40,"support_request":20},"age_days":1341,"labels":[],"created_at":"2023-01-11T07:51:59.498608+00:00","updated_at":"2023-01-11T07:51:59.498608+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":40,"support_request":20,"confidence":40,"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":21827,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1258","title":"Improve typing and linting","author":"bepri","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/1258","summary":"Maintainer request to fix type errors instead of silencing with noqa and enable pyright strict mode. Core request completed: PR #1294 enabled strict pyright and follow-ups removed unnecessary noqa's. Inactive and closable.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue's core ask is implemented: PR #1294 'style: enable strict type checking with pyright' was merged and pyproject.toml now has [tool.pyright] strict = [\"craft_parts\"], and follow-up commits ('style: add easy noqa fixes (#1340)', 'style: drop outdated noqa's', 'linting: remove unnecessary noqa lines') addressed the noqa comb-through. The issue has had no activity for 361 days beyond an autogenerated Jira-sync bot comment, so it is both inactive and no longer applicable.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":9.0,"staleness":85,"complexity":55,"confidence":90,"support_request":5},"age_days":373,"labels":["Status: Triaged"],"created_at":"2025-09-04T18:23:12+00:00","updated_at":"2025-09-04T18:23:22+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":55,"support_request":5,"confidence":90,"impact":20,"quick_win":9.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":27272,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"2109593","title":"Risc-V builders fail to wget (large files?)","author":"~nteodosio","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2109593","summary":"RISC-V builders fail downloading the ~1.5GB Chromium source tarball with a ChunkedEncodingError during the Pulling llvm step of the llvm-chromium snap build. No maintainer response, no labels, no comments in ~13 months.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction in 412 days, so it has never been triaged. The failure is a network-layer ChunkedEncodingError on a large (1.5GB) download from Google's storage, which may be a transient infrastructure problem on the RISC-V builders rather than a snapcraft bug, but that determination requires maintainer assessment of the build infrastructure. Closing as stale is not justified since there is no evidence the problem is resolved or the version is unsupported.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":85,"complexity":55,"confidence":55,"support_request":20},"age_days":502,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-04-29T08:06:11.542940+00:00","updated_at":"2025-07-15T18:38:34.675199+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":55,"support_request":20,"confidence":55,"impact":40,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29892,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1996618","title":"Snapcraft does not list keys reported from snapd via External Key Manager","author":"~bugraaydogar","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1996618","summary":"snapcraft list-keys fails to show keys from External Key Manager when no keys are registered. Unlabelled, 0 comments, inactive for ~3.2 years.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 1388 days old with no maintainer response. The referenced code is in `snapcraft_legacy/_store.py`, and a related issue (#1858994) indicates the `list-keys` command was removed and replaced by `snapcraft keys`, making this issue no longer applicable.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":18.75,"staleness":85,"complexity":25,"confidence":55,"support_request":15},"age_days":1397,"labels":["craft-1804"],"created_at":"2022-11-15T14:47:34.215475+00:00","updated_at":"2023-06-13T17:02:57.267118+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":25,"support_request":15,"confidence":55,"impact":25,"quick_win":18.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":39753,"project_name":"craft-platforms","source":"github","external_id":"87","title":"Create a basic how-to for using craft-platforms","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-platforms/issues/87","summary":"Documentation enhancement to create a how-to guide for using craft-platforms. Triaged but inactive for 605 days with only automated Jira sync comments.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has been open for 605 days with no maintainer activity beyond automated Jira sync messages. While triaged, the original context mentions needing this before Launchpad fully utilizes the feature, which has likely passed given the time elapsed. The documentation request itself is valid but the prolonged inactivity and lack of engagement suggest it is no longer a current priority.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":32.0,"staleness":85,"complexity":20,"confidence":75,"support_request":10},"age_days":613,"labels":["Type: Enhancement","Status: Triaged","Type: Documentation"],"created_at":"2025-01-07T19:33:43+00:00","updated_at":"2025-01-07T19:33:53+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":20,"support_request":10,"confidence":75,"impact":40,"quick_win":32.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29223,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1723726","title":"“snapcraft register” message is mysterious and inaccurate","author":"~mpt","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1723726","summary":"Complaint that the 'snapcraft register' confirmation prompt is verbose, vague, and inaccurate. ~8.9 years old with no labels or comments, but the exact message still exists in snapcraft/commands/names.py, so it remains actionable.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no comments, and no maintainer response in ~8.9 years, so it has never been triaged. However, it should not be closed as stale: I verified the exact complained-about text ('We always want to ensure...', 'Would you say that MOST users...') is still present in snapcraft/commands/names.py at the current HEAD, and two related Launchpad bugs (#1723720, #1886223) show the same prompt keeps drawing user complaints. A maintainer needs to decide whether to rewrite the prompt (and the matching assertions in tests/unit/commands/test_names.py).","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":11.25,"staleness":85,"complexity":25,"confidence":75,"support_request":10},"age_days":3254,"labels":[],"created_at":"2017-10-15T11:05:27.414687+00:00","updated_at":"2018-06-15T15:46:31.397290+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":25,"support_request":10,"confidence":75,"impact":15,"quick_win":11.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29860,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1989149","title":"File conflicts between parts should include files with identical contents","author":"~rpjday","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1989149","summary":"Feature request to warn on identical file conflicts during staging. Untriaged, 4 years old, no maintainer response.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no maintainer response, no labels, and no assignee after 1455 days. The code in craft-parts/collisions.py shows identical-file tolerance is intentional (_file_collides returns True only for different contents), making this a feature request rather than a bug. A maintainer should assess whether a warning for identical conflicts is desirable.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":14.0,"staleness":85,"complexity":30,"confidence":60,"support_request":40},"age_days":1465,"labels":[],"created_at":"2022-09-08T21:22:14.202914+00:00","updated_at":"2022-09-08T21:22:14.202914+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":30,"support_request":40,"confidence":60,"impact":20,"quick_win":14.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29963,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"2025447","title":"Incorrect Downloads directory for LDAP user in snapped firefox & chromium","author":"~dgadomski","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2025447","summary":"Snapped Firefox/Chromium downloads to ~/snap/.../Downloads for LDAP users instead of ~/Downloads; untriaged, inactive 3+ years","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"No maintainer comments or labels present; the issue has clear reproduction steps and expected vs actual results, but has been inactive for over 3 years without any triage. The issue is about snap package behavior (Firefox/Chromium) rather than snapcraft itself, which may require a different project to address.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"staleness":85,"complexity":40,"confidence":45,"support_request":10},"age_days":1171,"labels":["se"],"created_at":"2023-06-30T07:46:03.821676+00:00","updated_at":"2023-10-26T08:30:08.790469+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":45,"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29964,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"2026734","title":"ld throws libc_nonshared.a: No such file or directory when run inside snap environment","author":"~mertkirpici","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2026734","summary":"User reports linker error for libc_nonshared.a when compiling inside snap environment; found workaround using snapcraft layout","suggested_action":"close_not_a_bug","suggested_action_reason":"This is a support/usage question about compiling inside a snap environment, not a bug in snapcraft. The user found a workaround using snapcraft layout, and the behavior is expected - libc_nonshared.a needs to be explicitly made available in the snap environment via layout configuration.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":12.0,"staleness":85,"complexity":40,"confidence":65,"support_request":75},"age_days":1160,"labels":[],"created_at":"2023-07-10T14:18:01.532627+00:00","updated_at":"2023-07-10T14:18:01.990403+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":40,"support_request":75,"confidence":65,"impact":20,"quick_win":12.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29973,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"2041182","title":"Desktop extension doesn't update GDK pixbuf module cache when reverting","author":"~gbeuzeboc","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2041182","summary":"Desktop extension GDK pixbuf cache not regenerated on snap revert, causing crashes. Open 1043 days with no maintainer engagement or labels.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue describes a clear architectural bug with a well-documented reproduction scenario and root cause analysis, but has been open for 1043 days with zero maintainer comments, labels, or assignee. Without being able to verify whether this was fixed elsewhere or is still reproducible in current code, a maintainer needs to triage this to determine if it remains relevant or has been addressed.","scores":{"impact":65,"quick_win":29.25,"staleness":85,"complexity":55,"confidence":35,"support_request":15},"age_days":1052,"labels":[],"created_at":"2023-10-26T13:31:16.899402+00:00","updated_at":"2023-10-26T13:47:09.742932+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":55,"support_request":15,"confidence":35,"impact":65,"quick_win":29.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29976,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"2042167","title":"remote-build doesn't support shorthand architecture format ","author":"~gbeuzeboc","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2042167","summary":"remote-build ignores shorthand architecture format in snapcraft.yaml despite documentation stating it's equivalent to full format. Untriaged, 1038 days old.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"This issue has zero comments, no labels, and no assignee, indicating it has never been assessed by a maintainer. While it describes a valid inconsistency between documented shorthand architecture format behavior and remote-build's actual behavior, the extreme age (1038 days) and the related launchpad issue #1870730 being abandoned without a fix suggest the project may have moved on. A maintainer should triage to determine if this is still reproducible in current versions.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"staleness":85,"complexity":40,"confidence":65,"support_request":20},"age_days":1047,"labels":[],"created_at":"2023-10-31T15:15:56.443792+00:00","updated_at":"2023-11-03T16:46:03.369484+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":40,"support_request":20,"confidence":65,"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29979,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"2044389","title":"snapcraft clean failed but exit 0","author":"~moisesperezespinosa","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2044389","summary":"snapcraft clean returns exit code 0 despite reporting an error about missing instance. Reported for version 7.5.3, no maintainer response in 2.7 years.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 2.7 years old with zero maintainer engagement and no comments. Snapcraft has evolved significantly since version 7.5.3 was released, and basic error handling/exit code behavior should have been addressed if still relevant. The issue shows clear signs of being outdated without concrete evidence it still applies to current versions.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":35.0,"staleness":85,"complexity":30,"confidence":55,"support_request":10},"age_days":1024,"labels":[],"created_at":"2023-11-23T15:50:38.988629+00:00","updated_at":"2023-11-27T13:29:11.415338+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":30,"support_request":10,"confidence":55,"impact":50,"quick_win":35.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29982,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"2048898","title":"No helpfull message when command doesn't exist","author":"~gbeuzeboc","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2048898","summary":"Unhelpful error when snapcraft.yaml command doesn't exist; no maintainer response in 967 days","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no comments, and no maintainer response after 967 days. While the bug report is clear with a minimal reproducer, it has not been assessed or prioritized by maintainers. The lack of any maintainer engagement after nearly 3 years warrants triage rather than automatic closure, as there's no evidence the issue is no longer applicable.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":26.25,"staleness":85,"complexity":25,"confidence":65,"support_request":15},"age_days":976,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-01-10T13:43:53.803976+00:00","updated_at":"2024-01-10T13:43:53.803976+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":25,"support_request":15,"confidence":65,"impact":35,"quick_win":26.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":4920,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"755","title":"Can't redirect the output of go run to a file","author":"kian99","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/755","summary":"go run output redirection produces empty file in rockcraft build environment; user suspects snap confinement. 650 days old, zero comments, no labels, no maintainer response. Go plugin since reworked and stabilized in craft-parts.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"No maintainer has ever responded, labelled, or assigned this issue (0 comments, no labels, 650 days old). The go plugin has been significantly reworked in craft-parts (go-use plugin, backstage integration) and the experimental flag was removed in #1194, but there is no concrete evidence the specific go-run-redirect behavior is fixed. A maintainer needs to assess whether this is still reproducible with the current go plugin or whether it is a Go toolchain/snap-confinement issue outside rockcraft's scope.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":15.0,"staleness":85,"complexity":40,"confidence":50,"support_request":25},"age_days":662,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-11-19T10:36:50+00:00","updated_at":"2024-11-19T10:36:50+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":40,"support_request":25,"confidence":50,"impact":25,"quick_win":15.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":39855,"project_name":"craft-providers","source":"github","external_id":"795","title":"Verify present addresses when adding a remote","author":"bepri","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-providers/issues/795","summary":"Enhancement request to verify remote addresses aren't duplicated when adding LXD remotes. No maintainer engagement in 378 days.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is an enhancement request with no maintainer response or comments in 378 days. While the feature request is valid (currently only remote names are checked for duplicates, not addresses, as confirmed in `remotes.py` line 100), it hasn't been triaged or prioritized by maintainers. A maintainer should assess whether this enhancement is still relevant and worth implementing.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":26.25,"staleness":85,"complexity":25,"confidence":65,"support_request":40},"age_days":396,"labels":["Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2025-08-12T17:19:31+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-22T21:58:50+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":25,"support_request":40,"confidence":65,"impact":35,"quick_win":26.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":15670,"project_name":"snapcraft-rocks","source":"github","external_id":"40","title":"`--workdir` is ignored","author":"VladRassokhin","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft-rocks/issues/40","summary":"Reporter found snapcraft rock ignores --workdir and requires project mounted at /project; self-resolved that /project is documented in README but not the announcement, leaving an open question on why a custom workdir cannot be used. No maintainer response.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"No labels, no assignee, and no maintainer response in ~28 months (last activity 852 days ago). The reporter self-resolved the documentation question (confirmed /project is in README.rst) but left an open design question about why a custom workdir is rejected, which needs a maintainer to confirm whether it is by-design or a feature request before it can be closed.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":14.0,"staleness":85,"complexity":30,"confidence":60,"support_request":65},"age_days":864,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-05-01T20:03:45+00:00","updated_at":"2024-05-01T20:23:37+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":30,"support_request":65,"confidence":60,"impact":20,"quick_win":14.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":39826,"project_name":"craft-providers","source":"github","external_id":"467","title":"macOS CI is failing weekly tests","author":"mr-cal","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-providers/issues/467","summary":"macOS CI weekly tests failing due to runner timeouts; tests temporarily disabled via PR #982; issue remains open but inactive for 136 days.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has been inactive for 136 days and the macOS tests were temporarily disabled via PR #982 as a workaround. The underlying problem may no longer be relevant given the age of the issue (1010 days) and the lack of maintainer engagement.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":85,"complexity":40,"confidence":65,"support_request":10},"age_days":1018,"labels":["Type: Bug"],"created_at":"2023-11-29T19:09:15+00:00","updated_at":"2026-04-22T02:47:53+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":65,"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":3001,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"1125","title":"Add SECURITY.md to templates","author":"sed-i","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/1125","summary":"Request to add SECURITY.md to templates. Work completed in starbase#356 (merged). Issue is stale with no activity since Nov 2024.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The requested work has been completed via starbase#356 (merged), which adds a SECURITY.md template to standardize vulnerability reporting. The issue has been inactive since November 2024, and the original blocker (starbase#82) is now closed with the implementation merged.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":34.0,"staleness":85,"complexity":15,"confidence":80,"support_request":20},"age_days":1185,"labels":[],"created_at":"2023-06-15T15:02:05+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:18:25+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":15,"support_request":20,"confidence":80,"impact":40,"quick_win":34.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":39748,"project_name":"craft-platforms","source":"github","external_id":"189","title":"Merge Starbase every week","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-platforms/issues/189","summary":"Feature request to create a weekly automated workflow merging changes from the starbase repository. Untriaged, no maintainer engagement after 305 days.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"This is an untriaged feature request with no labels, no comments, and no maintainer engagement after 305 days. While created by a maintainer (lengau), it has never been assessed or prioritized. The request to automate starbase merges is a legitimate feature, but without maintainer input it's unclear if it's still relevant or if the approach has changed.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"staleness":85,"complexity":40,"confidence":60,"support_request":10},"age_days":313,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-11-03T11:13:32+00:00","updated_at":"2025-11-03T11:13:44+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":60,"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":39755,"project_name":"craft-platforms","source":"github","external_id":"45","title":"Add go architectures and a way to convert between deb arches and go arches","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-platforms/issues/45","summary":"Feature request to add Go architecture support and deb-to-Go architecture conversion to craft_platforms. Issue is 723 days old with no maintainer engagement or labels.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 723 days old with no maintainer labels, no assignee, and only a Jira sync bot comment. No related issues or PRs were found indicating this was implemented elsewhere. The lack of engagement over a year suggests this feature is no longer a priority or has been addressed through other means.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"staleness":85,"complexity":40,"confidence":60,"support_request":10},"age_days":731,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-09-11T17:21:30+00:00","updated_at":"2024-11-18T18:22:55+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":60,"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":30018,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"2080610","title":"Library linter should still consider ignored files for dependencies","author":"~saviq","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2080610","summary":"Library linter should consider ignored files for dependency checking; user reports that after ignoring dlopen'd libraries, other dependent libraries still trigger warnings. No maintainer response after 721 days.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is well-described with a clear reproduction scenario but has zero maintainer engagement (no labels, no comments, no assignee) after 721 days. It needs triage to determine if this is still a valid bug in the current linter implementation or if the behavior has changed.","scores":{"impact":60,"quick_win":30.0,"staleness":85,"complexity":50,"confidence":60,"support_request":20},"age_days":730,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-09-13T08:43:11.545535+00:00","updated_at":"2024-09-26T19:28:13.858162+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":50,"support_request":20,"confidence":60,"impact":60,"quick_win":30.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":6793,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"5086","title":"snapcraft status lists several time the same information","author":"seb128","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/5086","summary":"snapcraft status prints the same track/arch/channel rows multiple times in its table output. Reported against snapcraft 8.4.1 on Ubuntu Oracular; no maintainer response, no labels, no activity since filing ~2 years ago.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"No labels, no comments, no assignee, and no maintainer interaction in ~2 years, so it has never been triaged. The current status.py code shows a deliberate repeat=not sys.stdout.isatty() behavior that repeats track/arch columns when output is not a TTY, which may explain the reporter's output, but this needs a maintainer to confirm whether it's intended or a real bug before closing.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":19.5,"staleness":85,"complexity":35,"confidence":55,"support_request":15},"age_days":710,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-10-02T14:11:02+00:00","updated_at":"2024-10-02T14:11:02+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":35,"support_request":15,"confidence":55,"impact":30,"quick_win":19.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":39771,"project_name":"craft-providers","source":"github","external_id":"119","title":"Provide fixtures / some helpers to test an application using craft-providers","author":"jugmac00","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-providers/issues/119","summary":"Enhancement request from 4+ years ago asking for test fixtures/helpers for downstream craft-providers consumers. No maintainer comments, no assignee.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"This enhancement request is 1586 days old with zero maintainer comments or assignee. The project has evolved significantly over 4+ years and the testing patterns referenced (e.g., mocking JSON responses) may no longer apply. The lack of any maintainer engagement despite the age indicates this is no longer a priority.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"staleness":85,"complexity":40,"confidence":70,"support_request":20},"age_days":1594,"labels":["Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2022-05-02T10:31:23+00:00","updated_at":"2026-04-22T02:50:24+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":40,"support_request":20,"confidence":70,"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29578,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1834469","title":"error messaging for invalid macaroon could be improved","author":"~jdstrand","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1834469","summary":"Snapcraft shows a confusing 'missing a valid macaroon' error when the store macaroon expires; suggests guiding users to snapcraft login. 7 years old, no labels, no comments, no maintainer response. Related craft-store#97 tracks the same problem class.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no assignee, and zero comments in 7 years, so it has never been assessed by a maintainer. It is not safe to close as stale because craft-store#97 (open, triaged with Jira ticket CRAFT-3385, active ~11 months ago) shows the same problem class is still being tracked, and I could not inspect current code to confirm the message is still unhelpful. A maintainer should decide whether to fold this into craft-store#97 or address it in snapcraft's error handling.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":18.75,"staleness":85,"complexity":25,"confidence":55,"support_request":25},"age_days":2634,"labels":[],"created_at":"2019-06-27T11:35:19.109981+00:00","updated_at":"2023-08-10T13:26:55.493275+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":25,"support_request":25,"confidence":55,"impact":25,"quick_win":18.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29450,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1804845","title":"Applications requiring UTF-8 fail","author":"~merlijn-sebrechts","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1804845","summary":"Python snaps fail when host locale is not available inside the snap, causing UTF-8 fallback to ASCII. Issue requests snapcraft provide a built-in fix (e.g. default LC_ALL=C.UTF-8). Open since 2017, no maintainer response, no labels.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 2838 days old with zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction, indicating it has never been triaged. However, the underlying problem (locale/UTF-8 handling in snaps) is a real and recurring issue affecting many Python-based snaps, and the repo still contains 14 references to C.UTF-8 and 11 to LC_ALL, suggesting the topic remains relevant. It is not clearly stale or irrelevant — the problem may still exist in current snapcraft versions — so closing would be premature without verification. A maintainer should assess whether modern snapcraft (core22/core24 bases) already handles this or if a default locale injection is warranted.","scores":{"impact":65,"quick_win":29.25,"staleness":85,"complexity":55,"confidence":55,"support_request":30},"age_days":2850,"labels":[],"created_at":"2018-11-23T14:38:21.369784+00:00","updated_at":"2022-02-28T11:35:01.336959+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":55,"support_request":30,"confidence":55,"impact":65,"quick_win":29.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":15652,"project_name":"snapcraft-rocks","source":"github","external_id":"58","title":"Run YAML validity/schema linters before `snapcraft`","author":"abitrolly","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft-rocks/issues/58","summary":"Feature request to run YAML validity/schema linters before snapcraft to catch typos like a missing base: key. Maintainer redirected it to snapcraft/craft-parts as not a bug in this repo; reporter asked for a move, but it has sat unlabelled and inactive for ~23 months.","suggested_action":"close_not_a_bug","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer tigarmo explicitly triaged this and stated the missing-base handling and state-loading problems are 'a bug in Snapcraft, or craft-parts. I don't think it's a bug here,' so the request is misdirected to snapcraft-rocks. The reporter asked for it to be moved/reticketed but no action followed, and the issue has been unlabelled and inactive for ~23 months, so it should be closed here with a pointer to the correct repos rather than kept open.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":14.0,"staleness":85,"complexity":30,"confidence":80,"support_request":15},"age_days":718,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-09-24T14:26:25+00:00","updated_at":"2024-09-27T05:15:50+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":30,"support_request":15,"confidence":80,"impact":20,"quick_win":14.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":27677,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"2008502","title":"mishandled private git+ssh repo url","author":"~ondrak","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2008502","summary":"Snapcraft 7.2.8 treats a git+ssh:// source URL as a local file path when cloning a private Launchpad repo, so git clone fails. No maintainer response in over 3 years; the pip-style scheme is invalid for git, which only accepts ssh:// or user@host:path forms.","suggested_action":"close_not_a_bug","suggested_action_reason":"The reported failure is working as intended: 'git+ssh://' is a pip-style scheme that neither git nor craft-parts recognizes as a remote URL, so it is (correctly) treated as a local path, as shown by the 'file:///home/ubuntu/test-snap/git+ssh://...' clone command in the error. The user should use 'ssh://git.launchpad.net/~my-team/me/+git/my-project' or 'git@launchpad.net:~my-team/me/+git/my-project' instead; at most a clearer error message for unrecognized schemes could be filed separately.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":12.75,"staleness":85,"complexity":15,"confidence":60,"support_request":80},"age_days":1296,"labels":[],"created_at":"2023-02-24T16:05:20.896207+00:00","updated_at":"2023-04-26T16:30:08.522514+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":15,"support_request":80,"confidence":60,"impact":15,"quick_win":12.75,"has_related_links":false},{"id":39857,"project_name":"craft-providers","source":"github","external_id":"793","title":"Warn about unused parameters in subprocess calls","author":"bepri","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-providers/issues/793","summary":"Enhancement to warn when kwargs are silently ignored by subprocess.Popen in LXC and Multipass exec methods. Untriaged, 378 days inactive.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is a valid enhancement request — the LXC `exec` method in lxc.py (lines 534-537) silently ignores `timeout` and `check` kwargs when `runner is subprocess.Popen`, and no warning is raised. However, it has had zero maintainer comments in 378 days and no assignee, so it needs triage before any action can be taken.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":33.75,"staleness":85,"complexity":25,"confidence":55,"support_request":15},"age_days":396,"labels":["Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2025-08-12T14:41:37+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-22T21:58:50+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":25,"support_request":15,"confidence":55,"impact":45,"quick_win":33.75,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29923,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"2008558","title":"changing cmake-parameters doesn't invalidate part","author":"~merlijn-sebrechts","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2008558","summary":"CMake plugin's cmake-parameters property changes don't trigger part rebuild invalidation, causing skipped builds.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"Issue has no maintainer comments, labels, or assignee after 1286 days. While stale, there's no evidence it's been fixed or is no longer applicable to current craft-parts versions. Requires maintainer assessment to determine if the bug persists and whether plugin properties are properly tracked for invalidation.","scores":{"impact":55,"quick_win":30.25,"staleness":85,"complexity":45,"confidence":65,"support_request":15},"age_days":1295,"labels":[],"created_at":"2023-02-25T14:02:10.752871+00:00","updated_at":"2023-02-25T14:02:11.468071+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":45,"support_request":15,"confidence":65,"impact":55,"quick_win":30.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":46484,"project_name":"fetch-service","source":"github","external_id":"248","title":"Add `https://git.staging.snapcraftcontent.com` as a valid git/sourcecraft origin","author":"tigarmo","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/fetch-service/issues/248","summary":"Feature request to add staging.snapcraftcontent.com as a valid git/sourcecraft origin. Issue is 705 days old with last activity 390 days ago. The URL already appears in multiple configuration files in the repo.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 705 days old with last activity 390 days ago. The URL already appears in multiple configuration files (proxy ACL, test configs, testdata), suggesting it may already be supported. The comment indicates this was waiting for a configurable version of the Fetch Service to be deployed, but there's no evidence this was completed or that the hardcoded list was updated.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":24.0,"staleness":85,"complexity":20,"confidence":65,"support_request":10},"age_days":708,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-10-04T15:09:33+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:15:45+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":20,"support_request":10,"confidence":65,"impact":30,"quick_win":24.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":39787,"project_name":"craft-providers","source":"github","external_id":"468","title":"Check for a running process should be more fine-grained","author":"mr-cal","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-providers/issues/468","summary":"Enhancement to verify PID is a Python process via /proc/<pid>/cmdline instead of just checking PID existence, avoiding 60s delay on PID reuse. Open 1010 days with no comments or implementation.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"This enhancement has been open for 1010 days with zero comments and no implementation. The code still shows the original behavior (craft_providers/lxd/launcher.py:688 only checks Path(f'/proc/{pid}').exists() without verifying the process is Python). While the issue is technically still valid, the complete lack of maintainer engagement or discussion over nearly 3 years indicates it's no longer a priority.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":28.0,"staleness":85,"complexity":30,"confidence":75,"support_request":10},"age_days":1018,"labels":["Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2023-11-29T19:37:59+00:00","updated_at":"2026-04-22T02:50:04+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":30,"support_request":10,"confidence":75,"impact":40,"quick_win":28.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":39777,"project_name":"craft-providers","source":"github","external_id":"304","title":"Base _setup_wait_for_system_ready should use systemctl's --wait parameter","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-providers/issues/304","summary":"Enhancement to use systemctl --wait instead of polling in _setup_wait_for_system_ready. Open 3+ years with no maintainer engagement.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has been open for over 3 years (1183 days) with zero maintainer comments or engagement. The referenced distros (CentOS 7, Ubuntu Xenial) are EOL, and the code still uses the original polling approach, indicating this enhancement was never prioritized. The suggested change is a minor optimization rather than a critical fix.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":22.5,"staleness":85,"complexity":25,"confidence":60,"support_request":10},"age_days":1191,"labels":["Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2023-06-09T23:38:23+00:00","updated_at":"2026-04-22T02:50:17+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":25,"support_request":10,"confidence":60,"impact":30,"quick_win":22.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":39764,"project_name":"craft-providers","source":"github","external_id":"948","title":"test: failing reproducer - snap developer-id not asserted","author":"lengau","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-providers/pull/948","summary":"PR claims to fix #445 by parsing developer-id from snap-revision assertions, but the fix (commit 5df1922) does not exist in the codebase and the issue remains open.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The PR claims to be 'Fixed in 5df1922' but that commit does not exist in the repository and the described changes (parsing developer-id from snap-revision assertions) are not present in the current codebase. Issue #445 remains open with no maintainer engagement since November 2023, and the PR has been inactive for 136 days without any actual mergeable changes.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":33.75,"staleness":85,"complexity":25,"confidence":70},"age_days":144,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-04-22T03:10:35+00:00","updated_at":"2026-08-29T12:24:16+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":25,"support_request":null,"confidence":70,"impact":45,"quick_win":33.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":39749,"project_name":"craft-platforms","source":"github","external_id":"114","title":"feat(architectures): add Go architectures","author":"lengau","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-platforms/pull/114","summary":"Adds Go architecture support and deb-to-Go arch conversion utilities to craft-platforms. PR is 528 days old with no reviewer engagement and a minor type-checking notification from ty.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"The PR is a legitimate feature request (fixes #45) to add Go architecture support, which has not been implemented elsewhere in the codebase. However, it is 448 days inactive with 0 reviewers. A maintainer should review to decide whether to accept, reject, or provide guidance on the feature.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":19.25,"staleness":85,"complexity":45,"confidence":70},"age_days":536,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-03-26T01:44:30+00:00","updated_at":"2025-06-13T23:48:04+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":45,"support_request":null,"confidence":70,"impact":35,"quick_win":19.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":4841,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"834","title":"DRAFT: Merge in Pro-Sources","author":"clay-lake","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/pull/834","summary":"Draft PR to build/publish snap under macaroon channel as prep for pro-sources merge. Superseded: pro-sources already merged to main via #1184. 532 days old, 0 comments, build failing.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The PR's stated purpose—building/publishing the snap under the macaroon channel as preparation for the pro-sources merge—has been superseded by PR #1184, which squash-merged feature/pro-sources into main with two reviewer approvals. The macaroonbakery/pymacaroons dependencies are already present in the main branch's uv.lock. The draft has 0 comments, 0 reviewers, and a failing build after 532 days.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":8.25,"staleness":85,"complexity":45,"confidence":78},"age_days":545,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-03-17T08:34:12+00:00","updated_at":"2026-04-11T02:16:02+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":45,"support_request":null,"confidence":78,"impact":15,"quick_win":8.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":2017,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2112","title":"doc: Unexpected None values in CLI description","author":"alex-ramanau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/2112","summary":"Auto-generated CLI docs for the close command in charmcraft 3.2.0 show <None> values in parameter descriptions and Usage. No maintainer response in 584 days; current code has proper help strings.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue specifically references charmcraft 3.2.0, which is several major versions behind the current 4.4. The current CloseCommand.fill_parser in store.py (lines 1036-1037) provides explicit help strings for both the name and channel arguments, so regenerating the docs would not produce <None> values. No maintainer has engaged in 584 days.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":12.75,"staleness":85,"complexity":15,"confidence":60,"support_request":10},"age_days":596,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-01-24T17:53:02+00:00","updated_at":"2025-01-24T17:53:20+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":15,"support_request":10,"confidence":60,"impact":15,"quick_win":12.75,"has_related_links":false},{"id":5493,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"181","title":"Add testing framework?","author":"sed-i","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/181","summary":"Feature request to add a testing framework to rockcraft, auto-executed after pack, similar to container-structure-test. No maintainer response or labels; no evidence the feature was implemented.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is a feature request with no labels, no maintainer comments, and no assignee after 1308 days of inactivity. While the repo has a TestCommand in its lifecycle commands, there's no clear evidence it implements the requested container-structure-test integration. The issue needs maintainer assessment to determine if this feature is still wanted or if an alternative solution exists.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":12.0,"staleness":85,"complexity":70,"confidence":70,"support_request":0},"age_days":1320,"labels":[],"created_at":"2023-01-31T19:09:37+00:00","updated_at":"2023-01-31T19:09:37+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":70,"support_request":0,"confidence":70,"impact":40,"quick_win":12.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":28035,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1770221","title":"A snapcraft.yaml with more than 1 after: stanza doesn't warn or error","author":"~flexiondotorg","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1770221","summary":"Snapcraft silently accepted multiple after: stanzas in a part, using the last one. Fixed: duplicate-key detection in yaml_utils now raises an error for any repeated key, including after:. Issue is stale (8+ years, no activity) but the underlying problem is resolved in current code.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 3036 days old with zero comments and no maintainer interaction. However, the underlying problem has been fixed: commit a40a34314 (parts: raise error when duplicate keys are used) added _check_duplicate_keys to snapcraft/parts/yaml_utils.py, which raises a ConstructorError for any repeated key in a mapping — including a second after: stanza. PR #3518 (yaml: detect and log warning on duplicate keys in snapcraft.yaml, CRAFT-553) was merged into master, confirming the feature was implemented. The issue is no longer reproducible in current versions, so it should be closed as resolved.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":32.0,"staleness":85,"complexity":20,"confidence":80,"support_request":10},"age_days":3048,"labels":[],"created_at":"2018-05-09T16:51:34.853112+00:00","updated_at":"2018-05-18T02:19:25.490243+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":20,"support_request":10,"confidence":80,"impact":40,"quick_win":32.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":4931,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"744","title":"feat: make requirements.txt for extensions optional","author":"toabctl","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/pull/744","summary":"Makes requirements.txt optional for 12-factor extensions by supporting pyproject.toml as an alternative. Maintainer declined the specific approach (Dec 2024), but pyproject.toml support was later added via #1090, making this PR superseded. No CI, no activity in over a year.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The PR is 668 days old with last activity 381 days ago. Maintainer @tigarmo explicitly declined the approach on 2024-12-03 ('the decision at this moment is to keep the extensions as they are'), and the feature has since been implemented differently: commit 4087b095 (#1090) added pyproject.toml support to gunicorn.py, so the code now accepts either requirements.txt or pyproject.toml. The PR's specific diff is no longer applicable to the current codebase.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":28.0,"staleness":85,"complexity":30,"confidence":82},"age_days":680,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-11-01T12:37:29+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:12:56+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":30,"support_request":null,"confidence":82,"impact":40,"quick_win":28.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":6230,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"5653","title":"Use pydantic instead of jsonschema for legacy project","author":"bepri","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/5653","summary":"Migrate legacy snapcraft project parsing from jsonschema to Pydantic models. Issue was closed as abandoned, but the legacy code (snapcraft_legacy) has since been removed entirely from the codebase, making the issue moot.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue was already closed as abandoned. Additionally, the legacy code it refers to (snapcraft_legacy) has been completely removed from the codebase (commit ffb164b7a 'chore: remove snapcraft_legacy'), so the migration target no longer exists. The issue is no longer applicable.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":12.0,"staleness":85,"complexity":40,"confidence":80,"support_request":0},"age_days":410,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2025-07-29T17:39:43+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-12T13:24:27+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":40,"support_request":0,"confidence":80,"impact":20,"quick_win":12.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":4949,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"726","title":"Passing custom gunicorn config for flask extension","author":"M7mdisk","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/726","summary":"Request to allow custom gunicorn config overrides (worker type, worker count, etc.) in the flask-framework extension. The specific async-worker use case has since been implemented via PR #747 (gevent detection), but the broader arbitrary-config request remains unaddressed. Issue is 693 days old with zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue's primary use case (async workers) has been implemented by PR #747, which added gevent-based async worker selection and a --args flask sync override, documented in docs/reference/extensions/flask-framework.rst. The broader arbitrary-config request is still technically open, but the issue has had zero engagement for ~2 years (693 days, 0 comments, no labels, no maintainer response). If the broader feature is still needed, it should be re-filed with concrete requirements.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":21.0,"staleness":85,"complexity":40,"confidence":75,"support_request":10},"age_days":705,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-10-07T12:07:42+00:00","updated_at":"2024-10-09T07:03:07+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":75,"impact":35,"quick_win":21.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29984,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"2050860","title":"remote-build `version: git` resolved too late","author":"~saviq","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2050860","summary":"Remote-build with version: git resolves SHA from mangled source instead of original. Untriaged, 955 days old, no maintainer response.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no assignee, and zero maintainer comments after 955 days. It describes a concrete bug (git SHA resolution in remote-build uses mangled source instead of original) with a suggested fix, but no maintainer has acknowledged or triaged it yet. Without evidence that remote-build or version: git has been removed or the bug fixed, it warrants triage rather than closure.","scores":{"impact":55,"quick_win":30.25,"staleness":85,"complexity":45,"confidence":65,"support_request":25},"age_days":964,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-01-23T06:45:29.919202+00:00","updated_at":"2024-01-25T19:39:00.358179+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":45,"support_request":25,"confidence":65,"impact":55,"quick_win":30.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":5014,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"661","title":"feat: add support for \"log-targets\"","author":"cjdcordeiro","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/661","summary":"Feature request to add Pebble log-targets (log forwarding) support to the rockcraft project schema. Open since 2023, no labels, no implementation found in codebase, and no clear use case provided by the requester.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is a feature request that has been open for over 2 years with no labels, no assignee, and no maintainer response beyond the initial question. The codebase shows no implementation of log-targets support, and the requester indicated they don't have a concrete use case yet, making this a candidate for triage to determine priority and scope.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"staleness":85,"complexity":40,"confidence":80,"support_request":10},"age_days":771,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-08-02T16:00:53+00:00","updated_at":"2024-08-05T07:09:15+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":80,"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":30010,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"2072436","title":" sudo snap install snapd, error: cannot communicate with server: Post \"http://localhost/v2/snaps/sanapd\": dial unix /run/snap. conect: connection refused.","author":"~lad203","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2072436","summary":"User gets connection refused error when trying to install snapd via snap on Raspberry Pi Zero. Issue is 788 days old with no maintainer response.","suggested_action":"close_not_a_bug","suggested_action_reason":"This is a support/usage question, not a bug in the snapcraft project. The user installed snapd via apt (the system daemon) then tried to install it again via snap, which is incorrect usage. The connection refused error indicates snapd isn't running properly on their system. This should be directed to Ubuntu/Raspberry Pi support channels rather than the snapcraft repository.","scores":{"impact":5,"quick_win":4.25,"staleness":85,"complexity":15,"confidence":90,"support_request":95},"age_days":797,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-07-07T16:38:14.898360+00:00","updated_at":"2024-07-07T16:38:14.898360+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":15,"support_request":95,"confidence":90,"impact":5,"quick_win":4.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":30011,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"2073694","title":"core24 / Qt6 : libEGL fatal: DRI driver not from this Mesa build (‘24.0.5-1ubuntu1’ vs ‘24.0.9-0ubuntu0.1’)","author":"~brouits","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2073694","summary":"Qt6 app with core24 base and gnome extension fails due to Mesa/libEGL version mismatch between base and extension. No maintainer response after 775 days.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"Issue has no labels, no maintainer comments, and no assignee after 775 days. The Mesa/libEGL version mismatch error may have been resolved in newer snapcraft versions or may still be relevant. Requires maintainer assessment to determine if this is a current bug, a support question, or an issue that has been addressed in newer releases.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":22.0,"staleness":85,"complexity":45,"confidence":65,"support_request":60},"age_days":783,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-07-21T10:47:06.416487+00:00","updated_at":"2024-07-21T16:40:22.120095+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":45,"support_request":60,"confidence":65,"impact":40,"quick_win":22.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":5019,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"656","title":"Properly support `build-snaps` with differing versions for independent parts.","author":"aznashwan","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/656","summary":"rockcraft should detect when different parts need different versions of the same build-snap and either snap refresh between parts or warn the user; no maintainer response in ~2 years","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction in ~763 days. The underlying craft-parts executor still installs all build-snaps once in prologue with no per-part version conflict detection or refresh logic, so the problem persists. However, the fix would require changes to craft-parts' executor to track snap versions per part and conditionally refresh, making it non-trivial.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":85,"complexity":55,"confidence":80,"support_request":10},"age_days":775,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-07-29T12:00:56+00:00","updated_at":"2024-07-29T12:00:56+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":55,"support_request":10,"confidence":80,"impact":40,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":5021,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"654","title":"Allow for configurable `skopeo` credentials during pulling of the ROCK base image.","author":"aznashwan","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/654","summary":"Feature request to add configurable skopeo credentials (via --src-creds) when pulling the ROCK base image from ECR, to work around registry rate limits. Open 763 days, no maintainer response, no labels; related issue #655 (configurable registry) also open and untriaged.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no maintainer comments, and no assignee after 763 days, so it has never been triaged. It is a legitimate feature request (not stale-irrelevant): the current rockcraft/oci.py still hardcodes ECR_URL/REGISTRY_URL with no credential support, and the related issue #655 (configurable base image registry) remains open and untriaged, indicating the underlying rate-limit problem is still unaddressed.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":20.25,"staleness":85,"complexity":55,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":775,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-07-29T11:30:46+00:00","updated_at":"2024-07-29T11:36:28+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":55,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":45,"quick_win":20.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":21847,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1238","title":"go-use plugin: Support `disable-parallel` parameter","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/1238","summary":"Feature request to add the disable-parallel part property to the go-use plugin. Labeled Needs information; maintainer awaits a real-world use case, none provided in ~12 months. Plugin still lacks the property.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The maintainer (issue author) explicitly called this 'extremely low priority until someone shows us a real-world use case' and labeled it 'Status: Needs information', but there are 0 comments and no use case after 363 days of inactivity, well past the 6-month threshold. The go-use plugin's build step only creates a symlink (no parallel build to disable), further weakening the case for keeping it open.","scores":{"impact":10,"quick_win":7.5,"staleness":85,"complexity":25,"confidence":85,"support_request":5},"age_days":375,"labels":["Type: Enhancement","Status: Needs information"],"created_at":"2025-09-02T15:24:28+00:00","updated_at":"2025-09-02T15:24:28+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":25,"support_request":5,"confidence":85,"impact":10,"quick_win":7.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":5067,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"608","title":"links that are emitted to the console must be tested","author":"cjdcordeiro","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/608","summary":"Request to add tests ensuring doc URLs/slug links printed to the console stay valid as Rockcraft docs evolve; maintainer suggested using Sphinx intersphinx to generate links dynamically. Open 2+ years with no labels, no assignee, and no follow-up activity.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is a self-filed engineering task by maintainer cjdcordeiro with no labels, assignee, or any maintainer response beyond the author's own intersphinx suggestion comment. It has had no activity for ~2 years, but the underlying concern (hardcoded doc URLs in rockcraft/pebble.py and schema/rockcraft.json) is still present in the codebase, so it is not clearly obsolete — it simply needs triage to decide whether to pursue intersphinx-based link generation or a URL-validation test.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":13.5,"staleness":85,"complexity":55,"confidence":60,"support_request":10},"age_days":811,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-06-24T07:15:07+00:00","updated_at":"2024-07-11T15:59:19+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":55,"support_request":10,"confidence":60,"impact":30,"quick_win":13.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29946,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"2016899","title":"Remove directory step takes too long","author":"~nteodosio","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2016899","summary":"Performance issue: remove directory step takes 680.5s during snapcraft build. Unlabeled, no maintainer response, 1234 days old.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue reports a specific performance problem (680.5s directory removal) with version and timestamp details, but has zero maintainer interaction (no labels, no comments, no assignee) after 1234 days. Without evidence that this was fixed or is no longer relevant in current versions, it requires maintainer assessment before any action can be taken.","scores":{"impact":60,"quick_win":30.0,"staleness":85,"complexity":50,"confidence":40,"support_request":10},"age_days":1243,"labels":[],"created_at":"2023-04-18T14:58:21.000212+00:00","updated_at":"2024-09-23T11:20:21.663410+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":50,"support_request":10,"confidence":40,"impact":60,"quick_win":30.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29948,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"2017587","title":"SNAP_REAL_HOME causes problem","author":"~soumyadghosh","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2017587","summary":"SNAP_REAL_HOME set in HOME causes permission issues on empty folders; reported 3+ years ago with no maintainer engagement or comments.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"Issue is over 3 years old (1228 days) with zero comments, no assignee, and no maintainer engagement. The issue references a snapd team investigation request and a forum discussion, suggesting it may have been addressed elsewhere or is no longer relevant to the current project version. Without concrete reproduction steps or recent evidence of the problem persisting, the issue has become stale.","scores":{"impact":55,"quick_win":33.0,"staleness":85,"complexity":40,"confidence":45,"support_request":30},"age_days":1237,"labels":["snap"],"created_at":"2023-04-24T17:28:49.913071+00:00","updated_at":"2023-05-24T18:50:56.761861+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":40,"support_request":30,"confidence":45,"impact":55,"quick_win":33.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29643,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1861614","title":"Does not detect source type for .txz","author":"~lool","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1861614","summary":"Feature request to auto-detect source type for .txz archives (currently only .tar.xz is recognized; source-type: tar works around it). No maintainer response, no labels, no activity in ~6.5 years.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is a small, well-scoped feature request (add .txz to the source-type detection mapping) but has zero maintainer interaction, no labels, and no activity in ~6.5 years. It is not stale-closable because the workaround (source-type: tar) still applies and the feature remains unimplemented, but it has never been triaged, so needs_triage is the appropriate action. Low confidence because I could not inspect the snapcraft source directly (tool errors) to confirm whether .txz detection was added elsewhere.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":21.25,"staleness":85,"complexity":15,"confidence":55,"support_request":20},"age_days":2414,"labels":[],"created_at":"2020-02-02T15:37:27.085522+00:00","updated_at":"2020-02-02T15:37:27.085522+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":15,"support_request":20,"confidence":55,"impact":25,"quick_win":21.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":6839,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"5040","title":"Docs: Add a tutorial dedicated to the \"default plugin + multiple binaries\" scenario","author":"sed-i","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/5040","summary":"Request for a tutorial covering the 'default plugin + multiple binaries' scenario (Go/Rust projects producing several binaries). Open 717 days, no labels, no comments, no maintainer acknowledgement. No such tutorial exists in docs/tutorials or docs/how-to.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no comments, and no maintainer interaction in 717 days, showing no sign of having been triaged. The underlying need (documenting how to declare multiple apps from a single part) remains valid — no such tutorial exists in the current docs tree, and the go plugin's multi-binary support (#3007) makes the scenario more relevant, not less.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":24.5,"staleness":85,"complexity":30,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":729,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-09-14T01:05:11+00:00","updated_at":"2024-09-14T03:56:15+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":30,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":35,"quick_win":24.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":21716,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1369","title":"Chisel slices always cut for the host architecture","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/1369","summary":"Bug report that Chisel slices are always cut for the host architecture rather than the target architecture when staging with a cross-compile. No comments, no reproduction details, no part yaml or logs provided. Open for 321 days with no maintainer interaction.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is a legitimate bug report (labeled Type: Bug, filed by a maintainer) but has zero comments, no reproduction steps, no part yaml, and no logs after 321 days. It has not been triaged, acknowledged, or assigned. The bug is plausible — chisel cut commands in craft-parts may not pass the target architecture — but no maintainer has investigated. Needs triage to determine if the bug still exists in current code.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":20.0,"staleness":85,"complexity":60,"confidence":65,"support_request":0},"age_days":333,"labels":["Type: Bug"],"created_at":"2025-10-14T17:24:16+00:00","updated_at":"2025-10-14T17:24:32+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":60,"support_request":0,"confidence":65,"impact":50,"quick_win":20.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":6912,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"4966","title":"Shared cache for Python wheels","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/4966","summary":"Feature request to bring Charmcraft's shared cache for Python wheels to snapcraft, reducing redundant wheel downloads and rebuilds. Filed by maintainer lengau 747 days ago; only a bot Jira-sync comment exists, no labels, assignee, or maintainer response. No evidence of implementation in snapcraft or craft-parts codebase.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no assignee, and no maintainer response beyond the automated Jira-sync bot comment (CRAFT-3230). It was filed by maintainer lengau 747 days ago with no activity in 536 days. Code searches in both snapcraft and craft-parts show no shared wheel cache implementation, so the feature is still unaddressed. It requires a maintainer to assess whether it's still in scope and prioritize it.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":20.0,"staleness":85,"complexity":50,"confidence":60,"support_request":10},"age_days":759,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-08-14T15:55:41+00:00","updated_at":"2025-03-13T18:37:05+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":50,"support_request":10,"confidence":60,"impact":40,"quick_win":20.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":5093,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"582","title":"allow adding customized label   ","author":"henrymao-zz","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/582","summary":"Feature request to add user-defined custom OCI labels to rockcraft-built images; untriaged for 810 days with no maintainer engagement, and the project schema still lacks a labels field.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no comments, no assignee, and no maintainer response in 810 days. Code inspection confirms generate_metadata() in project.py only emits standard OCI annotations (version, title, created, description, licenses, base.digest) with no user-facing labels field, so the feature remains unimplemented and the request is still valid.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":22.0,"staleness":85,"complexity":45,"confidence":75,"support_request":20},"age_days":823,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-06-12T02:00:09+00:00","updated_at":"2024-06-12T02:12:44+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":45,"support_request":20,"confidence":75,"impact":40,"quick_win":22.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":5096,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"579","title":"fork/exec error when building Go rock with the 24.04 build-base","author":"gruyaume","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/579","summary":"Go rock with ubuntu@24.04 build-base fails at runtime (fork/exec: no such file) due to missing base-files slice; reporter confirmed base-files_lib fixes it. Root cause (usrmerge) now documented; per-plugin package docs suggestion deferred to internal discussion.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The reporter confirmed the maintainer's fix ('thank you, indeed this does solve the issue'), so the reported bug is resolved via a one-line stage-packages change, and the underlying usrmerge/base-files requirement is now documented in docs/explanation/usrmerge.rst (rockcraft#1003) with a Go plugin example. The only open thread — per-plugin minimal package docs — was explicitly deferred to internal discussion by the maintainer as 'risky', with no follow-up in ~2.3 years of inactivity.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":21.0,"staleness":85,"complexity":30,"confidence":80,"support_request":65},"age_days":842,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-05-24T09:33:21+00:00","updated_at":"2024-05-27T12:35:27+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":30,"support_request":65,"confidence":80,"impact":30,"quick_win":21.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":5058,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"617","title":"Cannot build multiple ROCKs from the same repo with local source","author":"alnvdl-work","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/617","summary":"Request to build multiple ROCKs from one repo with local source by passing alternative rockcraft.yaml files to rockcraft pack; maintainer confirmed the removed part-name behavior was unintended and no file option exists.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"A maintainer (tigarmo) acknowledged the issue on 2024-06-26, explaining that pack <part-name> was removed because it was an unintended side-effect and that Pebble may not be handled correctly, but no alternative mechanism (e.g. a --file option) has been implemented. The request to support multiple rockcraft.yaml files from one repo remains a valid, unaddressed feature/limitation, so it should stay open pending a decision.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":85,"complexity":55,"confidence":70,"support_request":40},"age_days":809,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-06-25T19:23:31+00:00","updated_at":"2024-06-26T11:44:44+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":55,"support_request":40,"confidence":70,"impact":40,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":5036,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"639","title":"Move the build planner logic into craft-platforms","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/639","summary":"Refactor to move build planner logic into craft-platforms, requested by jugmac00. Work completed: craft-application#391 closed as resolved, rockcraft PR #715 and commit 5f898b32 implemented the change. No BuildPlanner class remains in codebase.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 775 days old with zero comments or labels, and the work has been completed: craft-application#391 is closed as resolved stating 'Build planner logic and filterer were upstreamed to craft-platforms via PR #25', rockcraft commit 516d29e5 'refactor: use craft-platform for the build plans (#715)' and commit 5f898b32 'refactor: use default build planner' implemented the change, and the current codebase has no BuildPlanner class — it uses craft_platforms directly.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":19.25,"staleness":85,"complexity":45,"confidence":85,"support_request":0},"age_days":787,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-07-17T15:40:50+00:00","updated_at":"2024-07-17T15:40:51+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":45,"support_request":0,"confidence":85,"impact":35,"quick_win":19.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":4594,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"1081","title":"chore: use pathlib to interact with craft-parts","author":"EdmilsonRodrigues","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/pull/1081","summary":"Adapts craft-parts API calls to use pathlib after upstream craft-parts#1424. 217 days old, zero comments/reviews. Same change already landed in main via commit 1406be57 'refactor: update for Path change in craft-parts'.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The PR is 217 days old with zero maintainer interaction, and the identical change was already merged directly into main as commit 1406be57 'refactor: update for Path change in craft-parts', which touches the same files (lifecycle.py, layers.py, etc.) and the current codebase already uses pathlib-based craft-parts calls.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":17.0,"staleness":85,"complexity":15,"confidence":80},"age_days":229,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-01-26T14:52:41+00:00","updated_at":"2026-01-26T14:52:41+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":15,"support_request":null,"confidence":80,"impact":20,"quick_win":17.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":4735,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"940","title":"feat: use configurable cache layer level","author":"cmatsuoka","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/pull/940","summary":"Makes the cache layer level configurable in rockcraft (+12/-14, 4 files). Open 374 days with zero comments, no reviews, and only the labeler CI check; the underlying craft-parts capability was implemented separately in craft-parts#1263.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"No activity for 364 days, 0 comments, 0 reviewers, and only the labeler check ran, so the PR has been abandoned. The feature it targets was already implemented upstream in craft-parts (commit 880aae70, 'feat: make cache layer level configurable (#1263)'), and the related craft-parts#1213 was closed as superseded by #1254/#1259/#1261/#1263, so this research PR is no longer applicable in its current form.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":26.25,"staleness":85,"complexity":25,"confidence":60},"age_days":386,"labels":["Type: Research"],"created_at":"2025-08-22T12:46:16+00:00","updated_at":"2025-09-01T13:20:17+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":25,"support_request":null,"confidence":60,"impact":35,"quick_win":26.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":21668,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1419","title":"ci: add tests that run in LXD containers","author":"lengau","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/pull/1419","summary":"Adds LXD container-based CI tests for interim/unreleased Ubuntu releases. 255 days old, no reviews or comments, all 16 LXD test jobs failing. Project has since migrated to starflow CI with use-lxd explicitly disabled.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The PR is inactive for 247 days with zero comments or reviews, and all 16 ubuntu-minimal-daily LXD test jobs it introduces are failing. More critically, the project has explicitly abandoned LXD-based testing: the current qa.yaml sets use-lxd: false in every starflow job, and commit #1677 is titled 'ci: don't install lxd'. The PR's core approach is no longer aligned with the project's CI direction, which now uses starflow edge platforms for unreleased-release coverage.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":17.5,"staleness":85,"complexity":30,"confidence":78},"age_days":267,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-12-19T22:32:32+00:00","updated_at":"2025-12-27T23:56:39+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":30,"support_request":null,"confidence":78,"impact":25,"quick_win":17.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29787,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1958930","title":"`snapcraft clean <part> --use-lxd` shouldn't wait for network","author":"~om26er","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1958930","summary":"Feature request: snapcraft clean <part> --use-lxd should not wait for network connectivity since cleaning only deletes directories. No maintainer response or labels in ~4.6 years; the network wait originates in craft-providers' wait_until_ready, which still exists in current code.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"No labels, no maintainer comments, and no assignee on this ~4.6-year-old issue, so it has never been triaged. The underlying network wait is confirmed to still exist in craft-providers base.py (_setup_wait_for_network called from wait_until_ready), so the request is not obsolete, but it needs a maintainer to assess whether skipping the wait for clean is feasible and worth the effort.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":16.25,"staleness":85,"complexity":35,"confidence":55,"support_request":10},"age_days":1692,"labels":[],"created_at":"2022-01-24T23:00:38.817216+00:00","updated_at":"2022-02-08T17:18:26.349049+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":35,"support_request":10,"confidence":55,"impact":25,"quick_win":16.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29794,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1965309","title":"Record the git ID used for the build in the log","author":"~seb128","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1965309","summary":"Feature request to log the git revision used when building a part from a git source in the snapcraft build log, useful when builds fail and no manifest is available. No maintainer response or labels in ~4.5 years.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no assignee, and zero maintainer comments in 1628 days. The craft-parts git_source.py code (lines 330-497) confirms the resolved commit is not explicitly logged after clone/checkout — only the git commands themselves are logged at debug level. This is a legitimate feature request that needs a maintainer to decide whether to implement it in craft-parts or snapcraft.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":24.5,"staleness":85,"complexity":30,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":1640,"labels":[],"created_at":"2022-03-17T14:29:29.667786+00:00","updated_at":"2022-03-17T14:29:29.667786+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":30,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":35,"quick_win":24.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29991,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"2054194","title":"GIt-LFS not pulled automatically","author":"~saviq","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2054194","summary":"Feature request to automatically run git lfs pull for git sources; untriaged, no maintainer engagement after 929 days","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no maintainer comments, and has been inactive for 929 days without any assessment. A grep of craft-parts confirms no LFS-related code exists, so this feature request has never been addressed or evaluated.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":27.5,"staleness":85,"complexity":45,"confidence":75,"support_request":30},"age_days":938,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-02-17T13:55:21.434767+00:00","updated_at":"2024-02-17T13:55:21.434767+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":45,"support_request":30,"confidence":75,"impact":50,"quick_win":27.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":2339,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"1790","title":"Set a charm version from `charmcraft.yaml`","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/1790","summary":"Feature request to accept a version field in charmcraft.yaml and store it in the output charm. Open 755 days with no comments or labels; blocked on design decisions about where Juju should read the version from.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no comments, and no maintainer acknowledgement in 755 days, so it has never been triaged. It is a legitimate feature request (versioning charms beyond channel), but the body itself notes it is blocked pending design discussions about whether the version belongs in a root version file or metadata.yaml, so it needs a maintainer to re-evaluate whether the design question is still open before any work proceeds.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":20.0,"staleness":85,"complexity":60,"confidence":70,"support_request":0},"age_days":767,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-08-06T17:49:38+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:17:55+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":60,"support_request":0,"confidence":70,"impact":50,"quick_win":20.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":28386,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1916333","title":"removing a hook from snap/hooks does not remove it from prime/snap/hooks","author":"~ogra","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1916333","summary":"Snapcraft bug: deleting a hook from snap/hooks/ does not remove the stale copy from prime/snap/hooks/, so the hook still ships in the package after a rebuild. Open ~5.5 years, zero comments, no labels, no maintainer response.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no assignee, and zero comments from ~ogra or any maintainer over 2018 days, so it has never been assessed. It is a genuine bug report (stale hook file shipped in the package), not a support question, but I could not verify via code inspection whether the prime-directory sync logic still has this gap, so it needs a maintainer to confirm reproducibility on a current snapcraft before deciding to fix or close.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":22.0,"staleness":85,"complexity":45,"confidence":55,"support_request":5},"age_days":2030,"labels":[],"created_at":"2021-02-20T13:20:08.505696+00:00","updated_at":"2021-02-25T13:14:06.263448+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":45,"support_request":5,"confidence":55,"impact":40,"quick_win":22.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29820,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1980155","title":"snapcraft close example recommends non-existant flag","author":"~jameinel","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1980155","summary":"Help text example for 'snapcraft close' incorrectly includes --channel flag that doesn't exist. Issue is 4 years old with no activity for 2 years.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 1527 days old with no maintainer engagement for 778 days. The fix is trivial (removing --channel from the help example), and the lack of activity over 2 years suggests the issue is no longer a priority. The project has likely evolved significantly in 4 years.","scores":{"impact":10,"quick_win":9.5,"staleness":85,"complexity":5,"confidence":55,"support_request":0},"age_days":1537,"labels":[],"created_at":"2022-06-28T22:00:37.872349+00:00","updated_at":"2024-07-17T07:39:02.058508+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":5,"support_request":0,"confidence":55,"impact":10,"quick_win":9.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29915,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"2006599","title":"using advanced grammar to build towards a certain arch does not work with stage-snaps","author":"~ogra","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2006599","summary":"Cross-architecture stage-snaps fail due to missing UBUNTU_STORE_ARCH variable in snap download calls","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no comments, and no maintainer response after 1303 days. While it describes a legitimate problem with cross-architecture stage-snaps requiring UBUNTU_STORE_ARCH to be set, the lack of engagement and age means it needs reassessment to determine if it's still relevant or has been addressed in newer versions.","scores":{"impact":70,"quick_win":42.0,"staleness":85,"complexity":40,"confidence":35,"support_request":10},"age_days":1312,"labels":[],"created_at":"2023-02-08T13:17:55.832609+00:00","updated_at":"2023-02-08T13:17:55.832609+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":35,"impact":70,"quick_win":42.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29919,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"2007789","title":"`snapcraft remote-build` does not support long syntax of the `architectures` top-level key.","author":"~brlin","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2007789","summary":"snapcraft remote-build validation error for long-form architectures syntax; likely fixed by PR #4793/craft-application PR #343","suggested_action":"close_not_a_bug","suggested_action_reason":"This issue reports a validation error with the long-form architectures syntax in snapcraft remote-build. A related issue (#4780) was closed as fixed via PR #4793 and craft-application PR #343, which corrected how snapcraft handles architecture definitions and build targets. Given the 1292-day age with no activity and the resolution of the related issue, this appears to have been addressed.","scores":{"impact":60,"quick_win":42.0,"staleness":85,"complexity":30,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":1301,"labels":[],"created_at":"2023-02-19T22:37:35.547669+00:00","updated_at":"2023-03-03T20:25:10.474062+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":30,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":60,"quick_win":42.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29941,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"2015091","title":"snapcraft download debian package from incorrect arch","author":"~aristochen","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2015091","summary":"Cross-architecture gadget snap downloads wrong arch deb (amd64 instead of arm64). Issue is 1249 days old with no maintainer engagement, labels, or assignee.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no maintainer response, and no assignee after 1249 days. While it describes a legitimate bug with clear reproduction steps and the reporter has offered to help with a fix, it requires maintainer assessment to prioritize and categorize properly.","scores":{"impact":70,"quick_win":35.0,"staleness":85,"complexity":50,"confidence":70,"support_request":15},"age_days":1258,"labels":[],"created_at":"2023-04-03T14:13:48.874577+00:00","updated_at":"2023-04-03T14:13:48.874577+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":50,"support_request":15,"confidence":70,"impact":70,"quick_win":35.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29966,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"2028303","title":"snap build installing old pypi version of argparse","author":"~kenneth-loafman","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2028303","summary":"Untriaged issue from 3 years ago about argparse being installed from pypi during core20 builds; no maintainer response or labels.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no assignee, and zero maintainer comments after 1141 days. Per guidelines, unlabelled issues with no maintainer interaction default to needs_triage. The question is somewhat open-ended ('What else might be installed in error?') and would benefit from maintainer assessment to determine if it's a reproducible bug or a support request.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":28.0,"staleness":85,"complexity":30,"confidence":70,"support_request":60},"age_days":1150,"labels":[],"created_at":"2023-07-20T17:54:18.104882+00:00","updated_at":"2023-07-20T18:10:38.327983+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":30,"support_request":60,"confidence":70,"impact":40,"quick_win":28.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":15676,"project_name":"snapcraft-rocks","source":"github","external_id":"34","title":"Snapcraft cannot authenticate proxy.golang.org","author":"zyga","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft-rocks/issues/34","summary":"x509 certificate error when Go tooling in snapcraft 7_core22 docker image tries to reach proxy.golang.org. Maintainer asked reporter to test 8_core22; reporter started but never reported back. Open 2+ years, no labels, no resolution.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer tigarmo asked the reporter to test 8_core22 as a potential fix on 2024-04-16; the reporter posted partial output showing the test in progress but never confirmed the result. No further activity for over 2 years. The 7_core22 image is almost certainly superseded by newer image versions that would include updated ca-certificates, making the original problem no longer applicable. Per guidelines, a maintainer request for details with no reporter response within 6 months is sufficient for close_stale.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":28.0,"staleness":85,"complexity":30,"confidence":55,"support_request":10},"age_days":885,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-04-10T16:03:32+00:00","updated_at":"2024-04-16T16:08:07+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":30,"support_request":10,"confidence":55,"impact":40,"quick_win":28.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":13581,"project_name":"craft-cli","source":"github","external_id":"159","title":"Allow to show the current progress in the window titlebar","author":"sergio-costas","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-cli/issues/159","summary":"Feature request to add a titlebar parameter to the progress method so build progress is shown in the window titlebar via ANSI codes. No maintainer response, no labels, and the feature was never implemented in the codebase.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 1167 days old with no maintainer interaction, no labels, and no assignee. The author's proposed PR #160 was never merged (no titlebar-related code or commits exist in the codebase, and the progress method signature remains unchanged). The feature request is still technically valid but has been dormant for over 3 years with no further engagement.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":14.0,"staleness":85,"complexity":30,"confidence":75,"support_request":0},"age_days":1179,"labels":[],"created_at":"2023-06-21T14:54:39+00:00","updated_at":"2023-06-21T18:17:23+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":30,"support_request":0,"confidence":75,"impact":20,"quick_win":14.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":13492,"project_name":"craft-cli","source":"github","external_id":"248","title":"[docs] clarify when to use `message` and when to use `progress(..., permanent=True)`","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-cli/issues/248","summary":"Docs task to clarify when to use emit.message vs emit.progress(permanent=True). Triaged and assigned to a maintainer, but the docs now distinguish the two and emit.warning() was added, so the original confusion is largely addressed.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"Inactive for ~2.2 years (last activity 810 days ago) and no longer applicable: docs/explanation/presenting-messages.rst now explicitly states message is 'for the final output of the running command' while progress/permanent=True is for important progress info, and the issue's own 'how to show a warning' example is now handled by the dedicated emit.warning() method (added via the referenced #256/#358). The long-term path forward the issue pointed to is complete.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":24.0,"staleness":85,"complexity":20,"confidence":72,"support_request":10},"age_days":883,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-04-12T21:37:35+00:00","updated_at":"2024-06-12T19:33:38+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":20,"support_request":10,"confidence":72,"impact":30,"quick_win":24.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":39604,"project_name":"imagecraft","source":"github","external_id":"366","title":"Correctly restore resolv.conf","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/imagecraft/issues/366","summary":"Issue about correctly restoring resolv.conf when tearing down mount points, referencing an external Launchpad MP from livecd-rootfs. No maintainer engagement after 72 days.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue references a Launchpad MP from livecd-rootfs (a different project) and has had no maintainer engagement or labels after 72 days. No code in the current imagecraft codebase mentions resolv.conf, suggesting this may have been addressed in the referenced MP or is no longer relevant to the current codebase.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"staleness":85,"complexity":40,"confidence":65,"support_request":20},"age_days":80,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-06-24T15:52:43+00:00","updated_at":"2026-06-24T15:52:43+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":40,"support_request":20,"confidence":65,"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":43877,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"1162","title":"fix: fail fast on unsupported lifecycle bases","author":"lengaubot","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/pull/1162","summary":"Moves unsupported-base check before lifecycle init to fail fast. PR is inactive (18 days, 0 comments) and appears superseded by merged PR #263 which implements the same base compatibility check.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The feature this PR implements (failing fast on unsupported lifecycle bases) was already merged in craft-application#263, which \"Introduces a base compatibility check in the Lifecycle service to block builds on mismatched host OS environments.\" PR #251 was also closed as superseded by #263. This PR is now redundant.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":17.0,"staleness":85,"complexity":15,"confidence":75},"age_days":25,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-08-18T14:05:43+00:00","updated_at":"2026-08-18T14:05:43+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":15,"support_request":null,"confidence":75,"impact":20,"quick_win":17.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":12776,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"297","title":"Provide a unified way to get the current build's BuildInfo","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/issues/297","summary":"Feature request to add a unified accessor for the current build's BuildInfo, validating the plan has exactly one entry. Implemented via AppService._build_info in PR #911, which raises EmptyBuildPlanError or MultipleBuildsError as requested.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The requested functionality is already implemented: AppService._build_info (craft_application/services/base.py) returns the single BuildInfo and raises EmptyBuildPlanError/MultipleBuildsError for empty or multi-entry plans, matching the issue's requirements. This was added in commit 89382915 (PR #911, 'feat(AppService): add convenience properties for frequently-accessed items'), so the issue is no longer applicable.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":24.5,"staleness":85,"complexity":30,"confidence":80,"support_request":0},"age_days":891,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-04-04T14:26:43+00:00","updated_at":"2025-05-23T17:26:59+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":30,"support_request":0,"confidence":80,"impact":35,"quick_win":24.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29943,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"2015370","title":"Undefined Symbol Error While trying to launch Application from a snap packaged VSCode ","author":"~ameya-v-singh","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2015370","summary":"User reports undefined symbol error in libpthread when launching apps from snap-packaged VSCode on core20; no maintainer response in 1247 days","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 1247 days old with zero maintainer response or activity. The reported error (undefined symbol __libc_pthread_init in core20's libpthread) appears to be a runtime compatibility issue with the core20 base snap rather than a snapcraft bug, and it is unclear if this remains relevant given the age and potential core20 updates.","scores":{"impact":55,"quick_win":24.75,"staleness":85,"complexity":55,"confidence":45,"support_request":45},"age_days":1256,"labels":[],"created_at":"2023-04-05T15:27:33.617191+00:00","updated_at":"2023-04-05T16:04:26.216626+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":55,"support_request":45,"confidence":45,"impact":55,"quick_win":24.75,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29937,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"2012950","title":"Can \"snapcraft extensions\" support \"--base=\" option like plugins?","author":"~rpjday","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2012950","summary":"Feature request to add --base option to snapcraft extensions command, mirroring snapcraft plugins. Untriaged, no maintainer engagement.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no maintainer comments, and no assignee after 1256 days. It is a feature request (not a bug) that remains untriaged. A related PR (snapcraft#6214) exists but also has zero reviewer engagement, suggesting the feature hasn't been prioritized. Maintainer input is needed to determine if this should be implemented, deferred, or closed.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":30.0,"staleness":85,"complexity":25,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":1265,"labels":[],"created_at":"2023-03-27T16:08:43.544465+00:00","updated_at":"2023-03-27T16:08:43.544465+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":25,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":40,"quick_win":30.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29931,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"2011993","title":"override-build exits prematurely, part build succeeds","author":"~awe","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2011993","summary":"override-build scriptlet exits prematurely but snapcraft considers the build successful, causing snap packing to fail. Untriaged, no maintainer interaction.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no maintainer comments, and no assignee after 1267 days. While the reported bug (override-build exiting prematurely without triggering a failure) is a legitimate concern with real impact, it has never been triaged or acknowledged by maintainers. The issue needs initial assessment to determine if it's still reproducible in current snapcraft versions and whether it's been addressed elsewhere.","scores":{"impact":70,"quick_win":24.5,"staleness":85,"complexity":65,"confidence":60,"support_request":15},"age_days":1276,"labels":[],"created_at":"2023-03-16T21:03:51.215701+00:00","updated_at":"2023-03-16T21:10:13.373744+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":65,"support_request":15,"confidence":60,"impact":70,"quick_win":24.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29927,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"2009970","title":"Desktop extension symlinks aren't updated on snap revert","author":"~lauren-brock","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2009970","summary":"Desktop extension symlinks not updated on snap revert due to .last_revision check. Untriaged, 1273 days old, no maintainer response.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no maintainer comments, no assignee, and zero comments — it has not been assessed by a maintainer. Despite being 1273 days old, there is no evidence it has been fixed or is no longer relevant (e.g., the desktop extension mechanism may have changed). Per guidelines, inactivity alone is not sufficient to close; a maintainer should evaluate whether this bug still applies to the current codebase.","scores":{"impact":60,"quick_win":27.0,"staleness":85,"complexity":55,"confidence":35,"support_request":15},"age_days":1282,"labels":[],"created_at":"2023-03-10T14:55:34.218654+00:00","updated_at":"2023-03-27T16:43:37.374156+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":55,"support_request":15,"confidence":35,"impact":60,"quick_win":27.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":4773,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"902","title":"Go plugin environment validation fails if toolchain downloads a new version","author":"hk21702","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/902","summary":"Go plugin environment validation fails when `go version` triggers a Go toolchain auto-download, printing 'go: downloading...' instead of a version string. Open 439 days with no labels or maintainer activity; bug still present in craft-parts go_plugin validator.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, zero comments, and no maintainer interaction in 439 days, so it has never been assessed. It is not a stale-close candidate because the underlying bug is still present: craft-parts' go_plugin.py validator still requires `go version` output to start with 'go version' and raises PluginEnvironmentValidationError on the 'go: downloading go1.24.4' line shown in the log. A well-formed bug report with repro steps and workarounds (GOTOOLCHAIN=local, double pack) that needs a maintainer to categorize it and likely route the fix to craft-parts.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":24.75,"staleness":85,"complexity":45,"confidence":80,"support_request":5},"age_days":451,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-06-18T16:30:11+00:00","updated_at":"2025-06-18T16:30:11+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":45,"support_request":5,"confidence":80,"impact":45,"quick_win":24.75,"has_related_links":false},{"id":13580,"project_name":"craft-cli","source":"github","external_id":"160","title":"messages: allow to set the terminal window title","author":"sergio-costas","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-cli/pull/160","summary":"Adds terminal window title setting via ANSI escape codes to show build progress. Last active 2.9 years ago; codebase has since undergone major refactoring (starbase merge, new emitter API). Feature never merged; issue #159 still open but untriaged.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"Last activity was 2023-09-25 (2.9 years ago) with the author declaring it ready, but no maintainer followed up. The codebase has since undergone major refactoring (starbase merge #340, new emitter API, ruff migration) making this diff obsolete. The underlying issue #159 remains open but untriaged with no active development, and the specific implementation would need complete rework against the current architecture.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":16.25,"staleness":85,"complexity":35,"confidence":75},"age_days":1179,"labels":[],"created_at":"2023-06-21T18:09:42+00:00","updated_at":"2023-09-25T10:58:47+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":35,"support_request":null,"confidence":75,"impact":25,"quick_win":16.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":21848,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1237","title":"go plugin: Support `disable-parallel` parameter","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/1237","summary":"Go plugin lacks disable-parallel support. Filed by maintainer as low-priority enhancement, labeled Needs information, explicitly awaiting a real-world use case that never arrived in 363 days of zero activity.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The maintainer (lengau) filed this issue and explicitly stated it is 'extremely low priority until someone shows us a real-world use case.' The issue is labeled 'Needs information' and has had zero comments or activity for 363 days, well past the 6-month threshold. No use case was ever provided, and the go plugin code confirms disable-parallel is still absent. The same pattern holds across 10+ sibling plugin issues, all equally dormant.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":11.25,"staleness":85,"complexity":25,"confidence":85,"support_request":10},"age_days":375,"labels":["Type: Enhancement","Status: Needs information"],"created_at":"2025-09-02T15:24:21+00:00","updated_at":"2025-09-02T15:24:21+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":25,"support_request":10,"confidence":85,"impact":15,"quick_win":11.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":30025,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"2086482","title":"No way to express different build dependencies on different architectures without repetition of the list of dependencies","author":"~fnordahl","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2086482","summary":"Feature request: snapcraft YAML grammar lacks support for architecture-specific build dependencies without repetition. No maintainer response after 671 days.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"This issue has no labels, no assignee, and zero maintainer comments after 671 days. It describes a grammar limitation in snapcraft's YAML parsing for architecture-specific build dependencies, which is a feature request rather than a support question. Per guidelines, issues without maintainer assessment should be triaged first before any closure decision.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":20.0,"staleness":85,"complexity":60,"confidence":70,"support_request":20},"age_days":680,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-11-01T19:04:12.299115+00:00","updated_at":"2024-11-01T19:04:12.299115+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":60,"support_request":20,"confidence":70,"impact":50,"quick_win":20.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":30023,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"2083964","title":"'dict' object has no attribute 'startswith' on `expand-extensions` on firefox nightly snap","author":"~saviq","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2083964","summary":"AttributeError in craft-parts when running snapcraft expand-extensions on firefox-snap nightly. No maintainer response or labels.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no maintainer response, and 0 comments, indicating it hasn't been triaged yet. It's a valid bug report with a clear traceback showing an AttributeError in craft-parts' `_validate_relative_path_str` function when processing the firefox-snap's snapcraft.yaml.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":31.5,"staleness":85,"complexity":30,"confidence":65,"support_request":10},"age_days":704,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-10-08T17:59:28.427020+00:00","updated_at":"2024-10-09T23:44:34.840721+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":30,"support_request":10,"confidence":65,"impact":45,"quick_win":31.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":30021,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"2081962","title":"Core24 accepts integer version, Core22 does not and gives obscure error","author":"~nteodosio","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2081962","summary":"Integer version in snapcraft.yaml causes pydantic validation error with core22 base. Fixed in craft-parts via coerce_numbers_to_str.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is already fixed in craft-parts: ProjectVar now uses `coerce_numbers_to_str=True` in its pydantic Field (with comment 'to handle unquoted versions'), which allows integer YAML values to be coerced to strings. This was added during the pydantic 2 migration (#771/#778).","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":24.0,"staleness":85,"complexity":20,"confidence":80,"support_request":10},"age_days":718,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-09-25T09:17:37.666166+00:00","updated_at":"2024-11-07T18:13:45.960943+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":20,"support_request":10,"confidence":80,"impact":30,"quick_win":24.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":30017,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"2080356","title":"Two python3 parts using setuptools are always conflicting on core22","author":"~gbeuzeboc","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2080356","summary":"Multiple python3 parts in core22 conflict on venv and __pycache__ files; untriaged feature request for better handling","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no maintainer response, and no assignee after 723 days. While the bug report is clear with reproduction steps and a workaround, it has not been assessed or prioritized by maintainers. The reporter identifies a legitimate conflict between multiple python3 parts using setuptools in core22, suggesting the python plugin should handle this better.","scores":{"impact":55,"quick_win":30.25,"staleness":85,"complexity":45,"confidence":55,"support_request":25},"age_days":731,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-09-11T10:32:00.946177+00:00","updated_at":"2024-09-11T10:32:00.946177+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":45,"support_request":25,"confidence":55,"impact":55,"quick_win":30.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":28142,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1928756","title":"export-login --expires silently ignores dates given in ISO 8601 format","author":"~bjornt","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1928756","summary":"export-login --expires silently drops date-only ISO 8601 strings (e.g. 2022-01-01), producing a macaroon with expires: None. Requires full datetime to work. 5+ years old, zero comments, labelled craft-215, no maintainer response.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 5+ years old with zero comments and no maintainer interaction, but the export-login command still exists in the current codebase (snapcraft/commands/) and the bug may still be present. The craft-215 label suggests project-board categorisation but not a substantive triage assessment. A maintainer needs to verify whether the date-parsing bug still reproduces in the current code before deciding to fix or close. Related issue #4226 (export-login ignores expires parameter) was closed as stale with a note that expiry is store-side behaviour, but that is a distinct concern from silent date-format rejection.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":26.25,"staleness":85,"complexity":25,"confidence":45,"support_request":10},"age_days":1944,"labels":["craft-215"],"created_at":"2021-05-18T07:48:37.444426+00:00","updated_at":"2021-05-24T16:38:55.040515+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":25,"support_request":10,"confidence":45,"impact":35,"quick_win":26.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29559,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1828600","title":"Unicode non-ascii characters in channel specification cause  a 500 response from the store","author":"~matiasb","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1828600","summary":"snapcraft release with a non-ASCII channel name (e.g. emoji) causes a 500 from the store due to an invalid UTF8 byte sequence in devportal's channel lookup. Unlabeled, no comments, inactive for ~7 years.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no assignee, and zero maintainer comments in ~7 years, so it has never been triaged. The traceback is entirely in the store backend (devportal/api/v1/handlers.py, devportal/models), not the snapcraft client, so a maintainer must decide whether to close it as out-of-scope/outdated (the store has been substantially rewritten since 2018) or add client-side channel-name validation. I could not verify current store behavior, so a human decision is warranted rather than an automatic close.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":15.0,"staleness":85,"complexity":40,"confidence":55,"support_request":10},"age_days":2682,"labels":[],"created_at":"2019-05-10T15:25:43.048468+00:00","updated_at":"2019-05-15T20:38:55.766339+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":55,"impact":25,"quick_win":15.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":46499,"project_name":"fetch-service","source":"github","external_id":"389","title":"Update snapcraft test to stable in CI tests","author":"cmatsuoka","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/fetch-service/issues/389","summary":"Request to use Snapcraft from the stable channel in CI tests. Unlabelled, no maintainer comments, 487 days old. Related work snapcraft-rocks#85 was merged addressing the same concern.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 487 days old with no maintainer engagement. A related issue (snapcraft-rocks#85) was merged that addresses the same concern — cleaning up tests after upgrading to a stable snapcraft version — indicating the requested work has been completed elsewhere.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":25.5,"staleness":85,"complexity":15,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":491,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-05-09T21:12:05+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:15:36+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":15,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":30,"quick_win":25.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":12409,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"664","title":"feat: add line number to error messages","author":"alesancor1","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/pull/664","summary":"Adds line numbers to error messages across 9 files (+157/-14). Pending review, 1 unresolved comment, no CI results, no changelog entry. Last activity 451 days ago (2025-03-17).","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"The PR was marked ready for review on 2025-03-17 but has had no maintainer engagement for ~15 months and has 1 unresolved review comment. The feature (line numbers in error messages) is still relevant — no commit in the repo implements it (searched for 'line number', 'line_number', 'lineno' with no matches), and related error-improvement work (#927, #433, #427) touched adjacent areas but did not add line numbers. However, the diff spans 9 files and the project service has been heavily refactored since (multi-base #812, Pro support #1047, deprecated API removal #1078), so the PR likely needs rebasing before it can be merged. A maintainer should review whether the approach still fits the current error-handling architecture.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":22.0,"staleness":85,"complexity":45,"confidence":55},"age_days":563,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-02-26T13:04:36+00:00","updated_at":"2025-06-07T01:44:44+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":45,"support_request":null,"confidence":55,"impact":40,"quick_win":22.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":12426,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"647","title":"perf(tests): remove duplicate fixtures","author":"lengau","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/pull/647","summary":"Removes duplicate test fixtures from tests/conftest.py now that the pytest plugin (merged in #645/#653) provides them. 564 days old, 0 comments, no review, pending. Codebase has evolved significantly since.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"557 days of inactivity with zero comments or review, authored by a maintainer who has not revisited it. The dependency (pytest plugin, merged) is in place, but tests/conftest.py has had ~30+ commits since this PR was opened (e.g. #644, #653, #655, #666, #674, #677, #686, #725, #786, #812, #829, #850, #868, #872, #907, #1047, #1084), making the +382/-123 diff across 13 files effectively obsolete and requiring a full rework. The underlying goal (deduplicating fixtures) remains valid but should be addressed in a fresh PR against current code.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":12.0,"staleness":85,"complexity":40,"confidence":65},"age_days":576,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-02-14T03:10:36+00:00","updated_at":"2025-02-20T21:24:17+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":40,"support_request":null,"confidence":65,"impact":20,"quick_win":12.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":30039,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"2120751","title":"Snaps can't be debugged via gdb even in Debug builds. ","author":"~maciek-borzecki","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2120751","summary":"Debugging snaps via gdb fails even in Debug builds. Issue references snapcraft#5652 which appears to be the same issue, stalled for ~12 months awaiting a minimal repro for GDB.","suggested_action":"close_not_a_bug","suggested_action_reason":"This issue is effectively a duplicate of snapcraft#5652 (same title, same description, references #5652 in the body). The related issue summary indicates the root cause is a GDB limitation with large debug binaries over remote connections, not a snapcraft bug. The issue has been stalled for ~12 months awaiting a minimal non-snap repro to file with GDB upstream.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"staleness":85,"complexity":40,"confidence":75,"support_request":60},"age_days":393,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-08-16T09:06:38.229123+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-19T11:50:51.248802+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":40,"support_request":60,"confidence":75,"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":28359,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1822709","title":"Snapcraft should consider dump part's file permission change as part changed","author":"~brlin","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1822709","summary":"Snapcraft's dump part doesn't mark a part dirty when a source file's UNIX permissions change (e.g. chmod +x), forcing manual clean. Reported 7+ years ago, no comments, no maintainer activity, and the underlying dirty-check logic has since moved to craft-parts.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is a legitimate bug report (dump part not detecting permission-only changes) but has zero comments, no labels beyond a tracking tag, and no maintainer response in ~2 years of inactivity. The dirty-check logic now lives in craft-parts (state_manager.py), so a maintainer needs to assess whether this is still reproducible there and whether permission changes should be part of the dirty check. No evidence it was fixed or closed elsewhere.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":85,"complexity":40,"confidence":60,"support_request":5},"age_days":2721,"labels":["craft-216"],"created_at":"2019-04-02T03:20:14.882698+00:00","updated_at":"2024-07-15T06:19:05.483214+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":40,"support_request":5,"confidence":60,"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":28395,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1948465","title":"Please add support for advanced grammar in stage","author":"~xnox","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1948465","summary":"Feature request to allow advanced grammar (try:/on $arch) in the stage directive, avoiding override-build workarounds. Open since 2020 with zero comments or labels; grammar support has since expanded to all part keywords, so applicability needs verification.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"No maintainer has ever responded, labelled, or assigned this 1774-day-old request, so it remains untriaged. However, the repo now depends on craft-grammar>=2.3.0 and a changelog entry says 'Extend advanced grammar for all part keywords', which may already cover stage — a maintainer should verify whether the request is implemented before closing or keeping it open.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":21.0,"staleness":85,"complexity":40,"confidence":55,"support_request":20},"age_days":1786,"labels":[],"created_at":"2021-10-22T14:12:04.678987+00:00","updated_at":"2021-11-23T14:34:13.058050+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":40,"support_request":20,"confidence":55,"impact":35,"quick_win":21.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":30009,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"2069292","title":"cannot install system snap \"snapd\"","author":"~mailaender","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2069292","summary":"Network timeout when snapcraft tries to install snapd from api.snapcraft.io during local build. User on KUbuntu 24.04 reports inability to reach the snap API.","suggested_action":"close_not_a_bug","suggested_action_reason":"The error message clearly indicates a network connectivity issue: 'net/http: request canceled while waiting for connection (Client.Timeout exceeded while awaiting headers)' when contacting api.snapcraft.io. This is a support/usage question about network configuration, not a bug in snapcraft. The user's attempt to reinstall snapcraft confirms it's environment-specific. The issue has been inactive for 805 days.","scores":{"impact":5,"quick_win":4.5,"staleness":85,"complexity":10,"confidence":80,"support_request":95},"age_days":821,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-06-13T12:07:08.376145+00:00","updated_at":"2024-06-20T18:56:58.104530+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":10,"support_request":95,"confidence":80,"impact":5,"quick_win":4.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":30005,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"2066040","title":"snapcraft.yaml validation errors are presented in a very user unfriendly way","author":"~jamesh","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2066040","summary":"snapcraft displays raw pydantic ValidationError messages on stderr instead of user-friendly formatted errors","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no maintainer response, and zero comments after 840 days, indicating it hasn't been triaged. The bug report is clear about the problem (raw pydantic errors vs formatted errors in logs), but requires maintainer assessment to prioritize.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":35.0,"staleness":85,"complexity":30,"confidence":60,"support_request":10},"age_days":848,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-05-17T12:25:33.327902+00:00","updated_at":"2024-05-17T12:25:33.327902+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":30,"support_request":10,"confidence":60,"impact":50,"quick_win":35.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":30004,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"2065801","title":"Snapcraft hangs with no space left on device","author":"~nteodosio","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2065801","summary":"Snapcraft hangs indefinitely when disk space runs out during shutil.copytree in craft-parts, instead of failing gracefully with an error.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no maintainer comments, and no assignee after 841 days. It reports a legitimate bug where snapcraft hangs instead of failing gracefully when disk space runs out during shutil.copytree. The code path still exists in craft-parts (craft_parts/executor/part_handler.py:472), so the issue may still be relevant and needs maintainer assessment.","scores":{"impact":60,"quick_win":45.0,"staleness":85,"complexity":25,"confidence":65,"support_request":15},"age_days":850,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-05-15T17:03:44.153918+00:00","updated_at":"2024-07-02T13:22:08.216436+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":25,"support_request":15,"confidence":65,"impact":60,"quick_win":45.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":16044,"project_name":"starbase","source":"github","external_id":"200","title":"Consider allowing renovate to auto-merge PRs without approval","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/starbase/issues/200","summary":"Maintainer suggestion to configure renovate to auto-merge patch-update PRs when all tests pass and renovate is the sole author. Filed 873 days ago with zero comments, no labels, and no further activity.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 873 days old with zero comments, no labels, and no assignee — it has never been triaged or prioritised despite being filed by a maintainer (lengau). It is a process-improvement suggestion rather than a bug, so it needs a maintainer decision on whether to implement the renovate auto-merge configuration or close it as deprioritised. Confidence is moderate because repository access was unavailable to verify whether renovate auto-merge has since been implemented in the CI workflows.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":17.5,"staleness":85,"complexity":30,"confidence":45,"support_request":5},"age_days":885,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-04-10T21:21:17+00:00","updated_at":"2024-04-10T21:21:17+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":30,"support_request":5,"confidence":45,"impact":25,"quick_win":17.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":30000,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"2064639","title":"snapcraft remote-build core20 armhf openssl error","author":"~gbeuzeboc","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2064639","summary":"snapcraft remote-build fails on core20 armhf due to OpenSSL 3.0 legacy provider error in configure hook. Unlabelled, no maintainer response, 854 days old.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 854 days old with no maintainer response and references snapcraft 8.2.1, a likely outdated version. The OpenSSL 3.0 legacy provider error may have been resolved in newer versions of snapcraft or the cryptography library. Without evidence that this issue persists in current versions, it should be closed as stale.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":22.5,"staleness":85,"complexity":50,"confidence":40,"support_request":20},"age_days":863,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-05-02T13:53:15.388652+00:00","updated_at":"2024-05-02T19:27:59.921653+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":50,"support_request":20,"confidence":40,"impact":45,"quick_win":22.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29159,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1683422","title":"post-stop-command not wrapped","author":"~mabnhdev","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1683422","summary":"2015 bug report: snapcraft copies post-stop-command verbatim into snap.yaml without shell wrapping, so $SNAP-style variables fail snapd's field regex and break snap install. No comments, no labels, no maintainer response; untriaged and unverified against current code.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has zero comments, no labels, and no assignee, and is 3423 days old, so it has never been assessed by a maintainer. It is a genuine bug with a concrete reproducer (external repo branch 'poststop' and the snapd error 'app description field post-stop-command contains illegal /bin/ls $SNAP/etc'), not a support question. Code inspection tools were unavailable (no pinned SHA), so it cannot be confirmed whether modern snapcraft still copies the field verbatim; a maintainer should verify current behavior before closing, since the reported failure mode may still apply.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":21.0,"staleness":85,"complexity":40,"confidence":55,"support_request":10},"age_days":3435,"labels":["post-stop-command"],"created_at":"2017-04-17T16:42:06.698647+00:00","updated_at":"2017-04-17T16:42:06.698647+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":55,"impact":35,"quick_win":21.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":39837,"project_name":"craft-providers","source":"github","external_id":"929","title":"Multipass is needed for TICS coverage","author":"bepri","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-providers/issues/929","summary":"TICS workflow needs Multipass installed. Issue is 172 days old with no comments or maintainer response.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 172 days old with zero comments and no maintainer response. The local Makefile already includes install-multipass in setup-tics, suggesting the fix may have been applied to the reusable starflow workflow or the issue is no longer relevant. Without evidence of ongoing work or recent activity, stale closure is appropriate.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":34.0,"staleness":85,"complexity":15,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":180,"labels":["Type: Bug"],"created_at":"2026-03-16T14:56:30+00:00","updated_at":"2026-03-16T14:56:30+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":15,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":40,"quick_win":34.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":1629,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2509","title":"Investigation: Spread test failures are due to craft_providers snapd initialization issue","author":"Copilot","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/pull/2509","summary":"Documentation-only PR adding craft-providers-bug-report.md about spread test failures from a snapd socket-activation race in LXD containers. Inactive ~8.5 months; the recommended retry fix was merged upstream in craft-providers.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The PR is a +200/-0 single-file documentation change with no maintainer review and no activity since 2025-12-08 (263 days). Its purpose is moot: the bug report was filed upstream as canonical/craft-providers#870, and craft-providers main now contains commit e0f6bc7 'fix: retry \"snap watch\" (#899)' which wraps snap_watch in retry.retry_until_timeout inside _disable_and_wait_for_snap_refresh — exactly the retry-with-backoff fix this PR recommended, so the in-repo bug report document is no longer applicable.","scores":{"impact":10,"quick_win":9.0,"staleness":85,"complexity":10,"confidence":82},"age_days":281,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-12-06T03:19:43+00:00","updated_at":"2025-12-08T21:24:25+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":true,"staleness":85,"complexity":10,"support_request":null,"confidence":82,"impact":10,"quick_win":9.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":15356,"project_name":"craft-store","source":"github","external_id":"98","title":"Prototype craft-store for returning pydantic models for all requests","author":"syu-w","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-store/issues/98","summary":"Prototype to convert all craft-store API responses to pydantic models. Partially done: some methods (list_revisions, list_resource_revisions) already return pydantic models, but others (whoami, upload_file, push_resource_revision) still return dicts or primitives. No activity in 3 years.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 1083 days old with zero comments and no labels, but the work is only partially complete — whoami() still returns dict[str, Any] and push_resource_revision() returns str, while list_revisions() and list_resource_revisions() already return pydantic models. A maintainer needs to assess whether the remaining unconverted endpoints are still in scope or if the issue should be closed as partially addressed.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":20.0,"staleness":85,"complexity":60,"confidence":70,"support_request":0},"age_days":1095,"labels":[],"created_at":"2023-09-13T15:06:48+00:00","updated_at":"2023-09-13T15:07:56+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":60,"support_request":0,"confidence":70,"impact":50,"quick_win":20.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":15161,"project_name":"craft-store","source":"github","external_id":"293","title":"Craft Store should raise a better exception if we get an un-decodable response from the server.","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-store/issues/293","summary":"Craft Store should raise a better exception if we get an un-decodable response from the server.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"This is a valid bug report about error handling in the Craft Store client. The issue is from 445 days ago with no comments or labels, indicating it hasn't been triaged. However, the underlying problem (UnicodeDecodeError bubbling up instead of being converted to a StoreError) is still relevant and would improve the user experience when dealing with malformed server responses. The fix would be relatively straightforward - catching UnicodeDecodeError in the HTTP client or response handling and converting it to an appropriate StoreError subclass.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":28.0,"staleness":85,"complexity":30,"confidence":75,"support_request":0},"age_days":457,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-06-12T13:14:35+00:00","updated_at":"2025-06-12T13:14:35+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":30,"support_request":0,"confidence":75,"impact":40,"quick_win":28.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29802,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1973030","title":"ProjectOptions() having wrong values","author":"~ondrak","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1973030","summary":"ProjectOptions() returns host machine values instead of respecting --target-arch, causing inconsistent cross-compilation settings (e.g. is_cross_compiling=False, target_arch=arm64 when --target-arch armhf is used). Unlabelled, no comments, inactive for over 4 years.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is unlabelled with zero comments and no maintainer interaction for over 4 years, so it has not been triaged. However, a commit 'project: use correct host arch when target arch is set (#3831)' exists in the repo history that may address this exact problem, so it should be triaged to determine whether it is already fixed before any closure decision.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":27.5,"staleness":85,"complexity":45,"confidence":55,"support_request":10},"age_days":1585,"labels":[],"created_at":"2022-05-11T14:11:47.172845+00:00","updated_at":"2022-07-17T22:59:48.958659+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":45,"support_request":10,"confidence":55,"impact":50,"quick_win":27.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":39681,"project_name":"craft-store","source":"github","external_id":"396","title":"Document the attenuations constants","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-store/issues/396","summary":"Documentation task for attenuations.py constants. The constants now have docstrings and a reference page exists at docs/reference/attenuations.rst. PR #2 merged with this work.","suggested_action":"close_not_a_bug","suggested_action_reason":"The documentation work requested in this issue has already been completed. PR #2 ('attenuations: new module with documented constants') was merged, adding docstrings to all constants in craft_store/attenuations.py and creating docs/reference/attenuations.rst with full API reference documentation via autodata directives. The issue is resolved.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":13.5,"staleness":85,"complexity":10,"confidence":85,"support_request":0},"age_days":81,"labels":["Type: Documentation","Status: Triaged"],"created_at":"2026-06-23T19:11:45+00:00","updated_at":"2026-06-23T19:12:26+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":10,"support_request":0,"confidence":85,"impact":15,"quick_win":13.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29599,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1844801","title":"Organize has different move behavior when using wildcard","author":"~merlijn-sebrechts","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1844801","summary":"Snapcraft organize keyword moves directory contents for literal paths but the directory itself for glob/wildcard paths, causing confusing 'already exists' errors. No maintainer response in 7 years; behavior still present in craft-parts organize code. Needs triage.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"No labels, no comments, no maintainer interaction in ~7 years (2537 days), so it has never been triaged. The inconsistency is still visible in craft_parts/executor/organize.py, which uses link_or_copy_tree for non-globbed trees and different handling for globbed sources, so it is not obsolete. The reporter also asks how to move contents with a wildcard, making it partly a support question, but the underlying inconsistency is a real bug/behavioral inconsistency.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":12.0,"staleness":85,"complexity":70,"confidence":70,"support_request":25},"age_days":2549,"labels":[],"created_at":"2019-09-20T14:02:26.131982+00:00","updated_at":"2019-09-20T14:19:24.075187+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":70,"support_request":25,"confidence":70,"impact":40,"quick_win":12.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":6203,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"5683","title":"Investigate why `list-keys` makes repeated API calls","author":"mr-cal","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/5683","summary":"Research task to reduce repeated API calls in snapcraft list-keys. The command was removed and replaced with 'keys' (PR #6144), which uses a single get_account_info() call. The referenced legacy test file no longer exists. No activity in ~13 months.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The list-keys command was removed and replaced with 'keys' in PR #6144 (commit 30c9fcd19). The new StoreKeysCommand makes a single get_account_info() API call rather than repeated calls. The referenced test file tests/legacy/unit/commands/test_list_keys.py was deleted in that same commit. The original problem is no longer applicable to the current codebase.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":11.25,"staleness":85,"complexity":25,"confidence":82,"support_request":5},"age_days":401,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Research"],"created_at":"2025-08-07T19:06:45+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-07T19:06:55+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":25,"support_request":5,"confidence":82,"impact":15,"quick_win":11.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":15473,"project_name":"craft-actions","source":"github","external_id":"39","title":"feat(rockcraft-pack): accept env-file input","author":"cjdcordeiro","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-actions/pull/39","summary":"Adds an optional env-file input to the rockcraft-pack action to source an execution environment before running Rockcraft. In Draft; author moved it to Draft after internal discussion and asked a reviewer to close it if the feature is deemed unnecessary. 5 unresolved review comments; test-action-code CI failing.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The PR has been inactive for ~15 months (last activity 461 days ago) and is in Draft. The author explicitly stated 'I moved this to Draft because after an internal discussion we had... feel free to close this PR if you agree that this is not needed after all', indicating the feature may no longer be wanted. A grep of the current codebase shows no env-file support was implemented elsewhere, so it was not superseded, but the author's own suggestion to close plus long inactivity and a failing test-action-code check make closing appropriate.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":24.5,"staleness":85,"complexity":30,"confidence":70},"age_days":479,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-05-22T07:44:27+00:00","updated_at":"2025-05-27T15:18:23+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":30,"support_request":null,"confidence":70,"impact":35,"quick_win":24.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29822,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1980533","title":"Suggests regenerating credential without telling you how","author":"~seb128","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1980533","summary":"Request to improve the 'Provided credentials are no longer valid for the Snap Store' error from snapcraft release to explain how to regenerate credentials (e.g. snapcraft login or docs link). No maintainer response; inactive for ~4 years.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has 0 comments, no assignee, and no maintainer acknowledgement (only an auto-style 'craft-1181' label), so it has never been assessed. It is a small UX improvement (adding a hint like 'snapcraft login' or a docs link to the 'Regenerate them and try again' message), but I could not verify whether that exact message still exists in the current snapcraft codebase, so a maintainer should confirm before closing or fixing.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":12.75,"staleness":85,"complexity":15,"confidence":55,"support_request":25},"age_days":1534,"labels":["craft-1181"],"created_at":"2022-07-01T15:02:56.420682+00:00","updated_at":"2022-09-09T12:13:20.438030+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":15,"support_request":25,"confidence":55,"impact":15,"quick_win":12.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29713,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1889741","title":"Snapcraft concurrent build","author":"~lawrencegripper","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1889741","summary":"Race condition when running multiple snapcraft instances concurrently: both check for $HOME/.cache/snapcraft/download and stage-packages, both see missing, one creates, other fails. Reported ~6 years ago, 0 comments, no maintainer response, no labels.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has zero comments, no labels, no assignee, and no maintainer interaction in ~6 years — it has never been triaged. The bug report itself is well-structured with a clear reproduction (concurrent snapcraft in CI/docker) and a workaround (pre-create dirs with mkdir -p), but no maintainer has acknowledged it. The referenced goreleaser issue (#1715) is from a different project and unrelated to this repo's issue #1715 (which is about catkin/rosinstall). Without evidence of a fix in the codebase, it cannot be closed as stale or fixed; it needs a maintainer to assess whether the race condition still exists in current snapcraft.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":24.0,"staleness":85,"complexity":40,"confidence":55,"support_request":10},"age_days":2235,"labels":[],"created_at":"2020-07-31T08:37:25.951483+00:00","updated_at":"2024-06-28T09:38:58.692212+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":55,"impact":40,"quick_win":24.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":13608,"project_name":"craft-cli","source":"github","external_id":"132","title":"The help produced for a command options should give more information","author":"facundobatista","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-cli/issues/132","summary":"Feature request to enrich command option help output to indicate whether an option expects a value, has a default, is repeatable, or has choices, similar to argparse. Open since 2021 with no comments, labels, or assignee; help rendering code still only shows option strings and help text.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is a well-scoped feature request from a maintainer (facundobatista) asking to define and implement a way to express option metadata (value vs flag, default, repeatable, choices) in help output. It has no labels, no comments, no assignee, and no maintainer response, so it has not been triaged. The current code in dispatcher.py (lines 395-407) still only appends (option_strings, help_text) tuples without any of the requested metadata, confirming the feature is unimplemented. Related help improvements (PRs #109, #111, #113, #271, #298, #306) addressed formatting and markdown but not this specific metadata display.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":15.75,"staleness":85,"complexity":55,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":1340,"labels":[],"created_at":"2023-01-11T12:08:22+00:00","updated_at":"2023-01-18T15:49:55+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":55,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":35,"quick_win":15.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":1844,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2288","title":"uv plugin breaks juju debug-code","author":"PietroPasotti","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/2288","summary":"uv plugin's dispatch script prevents juju debug-code breakpoints from being hit; reporter suspects the injected dispatch script is the cause. Open 14 months, no maintainer response, no labels, no reproduction logs beyond a screenshot.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is a genuine bug report (not a support request) with a clear reproduction path (juju deploy parca-k8s --channel edge; juju debug-code parca-k8s/0), but it has no labels, no maintainer acknowledgement, and no assignee after 14 months. The reporter's own comment (2025-05-15) suspects the dispatch script injected by the uv plugin, which aligns with the code in charmcraft/parts/plugins/_uv.py and charmcraft/charm_builder.py where the dispatch mechanism is handled. The uv plugin was added in #2050 and has been actively developed since, so the issue is still relevant to the current codebase. It needs triage to determine whether the uv plugin's dispatch handling differs from the charm plugin in a way that breaks debug-code breakpoints.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":85,"complexity":55,"confidence":55,"support_request":10},"age_days":486,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-05-15T08:55:23+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:17:50+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":55,"support_request":10,"confidence":55,"impact":40,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29987,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"2052798","title":"snapcraft overwrites log file names on error","author":"~popey","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2052798","summary":"snapcraft error messages overwrite log file paths on terminal, making them hard to copy","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no maintainer response, and 0 comments. It describes a real UX bug where error messages with end_line=True overwrite log file paths in craft-cli, but needs maintainer assessment to determine priority and whether the behavior is still present in current versions.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":35.0,"staleness":85,"complexity":30,"confidence":60,"support_request":40},"age_days":946,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-02-09T11:58:09.312720+00:00","updated_at":"2024-02-09T11:58:09.312720+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":30,"support_request":40,"confidence":60,"impact":50,"quick_win":35.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":30044,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"2136285","title":"Mail alert about a not-published snap with outdated package","author":"~t-a-k","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2136285","summary":"User reports receiving daily mail alerts about a snap revision not published on any channel. Issue has no labels, no maintainer response, and no comments.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no maintainer response, and no comments after 262 days. It is unclear whether this is a bug in the notification system (sending alerts about unpublished revisions) or a support request about notification preferences. A maintainer needs to assess the issue first before determining the appropriate action.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":17.0,"staleness":85,"complexity":15,"confidence":60,"support_request":75},"age_days":271,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-12-16T06:01:11.988300+00:00","updated_at":"2025-12-16T06:01:11.988300+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":15,"support_request":75,"confidence":60,"impact":20,"quick_win":17.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":6708,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"5171","title":"home interface plug attribute \"read: all\" triggers ValidationError","author":"florcabral","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/5171","summary":"Snapcraft rejects home interface plug attribute read: all with a pydantic ValidationError (expects list, got dict). Reported on core22; no maintainer response, no labels, no activity in ~2 years.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is a well-documented bug with a clear reproducer (pydantic ValidationError on apps.*.plugs with home read: all), but it has no labels, no maintainer comments, and no activity for ~2 years. The core22 base is still supported, so it is not stale-irrelevant, but it has never been triaged or acknowledged by a maintainer, making needs_triage the appropriate action.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":32.5,"staleness":85,"complexity":35,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":644,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-12-07T22:18:28+00:00","updated_at":"2024-12-12T17:12:52+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":35,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":50,"quick_win":32.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29986,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"2051841","title":"Plugs/Slots implicit assignment should be deprecated for `base: core24`","author":"~saviq","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2051841","summary":"Proposal to deprecate implicit plug/slot assignment for base: core24. Open 946 days with no maintainer response, labels, or comments.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no assignee, and zero maintainer interaction after 946 days. While the concern about deprecating implicit plug/slot assignment for core24 is technically valid, the extreme age and complete lack of engagement mean it hasn't been assessed or prioritized by maintainers yet.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"staleness":85,"complexity":40,"confidence":30,"support_request":10},"age_days":955,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-01-31T12:56:35.302998+00:00","updated_at":"2024-01-31T12:56:35.302998+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":30,"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":21562,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1527","title":"[DO NOT MERGE] resolute cmake","author":"smethnani","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/pull/1527","summary":"PR titled '[DO NOT MERGE] resolute cmake' inactive for 157 days; maintainer asked if it can be closed. Resolute support appears implemented in merged PR #1398.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The PR has been inactive for 157 days and is marked '[DO NOT MERGE]'. A maintainer (@cmatsuoka) explicitly asked 'Can this PR be closed?' in the most recent comment. The resolute support feature appears to have been implemented in merged PR #1398, making this PR obsolete.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":12.0,"staleness":85,"complexity":20,"confidence":75},"age_days":164,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-04-01T11:43:34+00:00","updated_at":"2026-09-05T00:43:42+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":20,"support_request":null,"confidence":75,"impact":15,"quick_win":12.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29980,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"2045895","title":"patchelf missing snap libdir rpath","author":"~saviq","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2045895","summary":"patchelf inconsistent rpath for classic snaps: proposed rpath missing snap libdir that linter expects. Unlabelled, 1002 days old, no maintainer engagement.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is a well-structured bug report showing clear inconsistency between patchelf's proposed rpath and linter expectations for classic snaps, but it has no labels, no comments, and no maintainer engagement after 1002 days. Per guidelines, even well-structured bug reports need triage if no maintainer has acknowledged them. The issue may still be relevant or may have been fixed in the intervening ~3 years.","scores":{"impact":60,"quick_win":36.0,"staleness":85,"complexity":40,"confidence":50,"support_request":10},"age_days":1010,"labels":[],"created_at":"2023-12-07T11:43:13.668528+00:00","updated_at":"2023-12-07T11:43:13.668528+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":50,"impact":60,"quick_win":36.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":46510,"project_name":"fetch-service","source":"github","external_id":"36","title":"SNAP: Find a better way to handle perl dependencies","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/fetch-service/issues/36","summary":"Optimization request to reduce PERLLIB environment variable size in fetch-service snap. Untriaged, no maintainer engagement in 950 days.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no maintainer response, no comments, and no assignee after 950 days. While the PERLLIB variable is still present in snap/snapcraft.yaml (introduced in PR #34), the issue hasn't been assessed or prioritized by maintainers. The referenced PR discussion (fetch-service#34) introduced the current PERLLIB configuration but didn't resolve the optimization concern.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":14.0,"staleness":85,"complexity":30,"confidence":70,"support_request":20},"age_days":954,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-02-01T17:04:57+00:00","updated_at":"2024-02-01T17:04:57+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":30,"support_request":20,"confidence":70,"impact":20,"quick_win":14.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":46508,"project_name":"fetch-service","source":"github","external_id":"282","title":"ANNOUNCEMENT: SNAP CHANNELS","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/fetch-service/issues/282","summary":"Announcement about snap channel publishing for main and feature/launchpad-integration branches; outdated as launchpad-integration was merged and is no longer in use.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 681 days old with 596 days of inactivity. The feature/launchpad-integration branch mentioned in the body has been struck through and a comment confirms it was merged to main and is no longer in use, making this announcement obsolete.","scores":{"impact":10,"quick_win":9.0,"staleness":85,"complexity":10,"confidence":75,"support_request":50},"age_days":684,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-10-28T10:33:40+00:00","updated_at":"2025-01-21T16:33:54+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":10,"support_request":50,"confidence":75,"impact":10,"quick_win":9.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29873,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1990950","title":"\"Environment validation failed for part 'xsv': 'cargo' not found\" with `base: core22`","author":"~saviq","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1990950","summary":"Snapcraft fails with 'cargo not found' when building a Rust project with base: core22. Issue is unlabelled and has had no maintainer response in 1114 days.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no maintainer comments, and no assignee after 1114 days. The error message is clear ('cargo not found and part does not depend on rust-deps'), but it's unclear whether this is a user configuration error, a missing feature in snapcraft's core22 support, or a legitimate bug. Without maintainer assessment, the appropriate action is triage to determine if this is still reproducible in current snapcraft versions and whether it requires a fix or documentation.","scores":{"impact":60,"quick_win":36.0,"staleness":85,"complexity":40,"confidence":65,"support_request":50},"age_days":1447,"labels":[],"created_at":"2022-09-27T09:49:14.212471+00:00","updated_at":"2023-08-16T17:43:00.832813+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":40,"support_request":50,"confidence":65,"impact":60,"quick_win":36.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":4770,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"905","title":"rockcraft 1.12.0 fails but 1.11.0 works with django-framework extension","author":"toabctl","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/905","summary":"Regression in rockcraft 1.12.0: django-framework extension build fails during prime with FileNotFoundError on os.chown for aws-import.py; 1.11.0 works. No maintainer activity in 433 days.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"No labels, no comments, no maintainer response in 433 days, so it has not been triaged. However, closing as stale is not justified: the reporter provided a concrete regression (1.12.0 fails, 1.11.0 works) with full tracebacks and CI links, and the failure (os.chown FileNotFoundError during prime in craft_parts) is a plausible real bug that may still affect users on 1.12.x. A maintainer should reproduce with the linked cloud-image-database rockcraft.yaml before deciding.","scores":{"impact":60,"quick_win":21.0,"staleness":85,"complexity":65,"confidence":55,"support_request":5},"age_days":446,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-06-24T06:52:45+00:00","updated_at":"2025-06-24T06:52:45+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":65,"support_request":5,"confidence":55,"impact":60,"quick_win":21.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":46502,"project_name":"fetch-service","source":"github","external_id":"424","title":"Have inspectors explicitly declare dependencies on other inspectors","author":"upils","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/fetch-service/issues/424","summary":"Feature request to make inspector dependencies explicit and auto-order them, preventing fragile manual ordering in insList. Untriaged, no maintainer response in 390 days.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no maintainer comments, and no activity for 390 days. It describes a legitimate architectural improvement (explicit dependency declarations for inspectors) but has not been assessed or prioritized by maintainers. Without maintainer engagement or evidence that this has been addressed elsewhere, it requires triage before any action can be taken.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":20.25,"staleness":85,"complexity":55,"confidence":40,"support_request":10},"age_days":409,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-07-30T13:25:56+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:15:33+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":55,"support_request":10,"confidence":40,"impact":45,"quick_win":20.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":46486,"project_name":"fetch-service","source":"github","external_id":"257","title":"Document how to generate captures for test data","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/fetch-service/issues/257","summary":"Documentation request to explain how to generate capture data for tests using tshark and SSLKEYLOGFILE. Unlabeled, no maintainer response beyond author cc.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no maintainer response beyond the author cc'ing @dariuszd21, and has been inactive for 390 days. It's a documentation task that may still be relevant but needs maintainer assessment to determine if the fetch service capture workflow is still applicable or has changed.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":21.25,"staleness":85,"complexity":15,"confidence":65,"support_request":25},"age_days":703,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-10-09T18:03:25+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:15:44+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":15,"support_request":25,"confidence":65,"impact":25,"quick_win":21.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":46480,"project_name":"fetch-service","source":"github","external_id":"247","title":"Use github.com/dpeckett/deb822 for deb822 parsing","author":"tigarmo","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/fetch-service/issues/247","summary":"Replace custom deb822 parser with github.com/dpeckett/deb822 library. Issue opened 705 days ago, last activity 389 days ago (auto-generated Jira sync). No maintainer triage or labels.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 705 days old with no maintainer engagement beyond an auto-generated Jira sync comment 389 days ago. It has no labels, no assignee, and no indication of being triaged or prioritized. The custom parser may have been addressed elsewhere or the project may have moved on, making this stale.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":28.0,"staleness":85,"complexity":30,"confidence":60,"support_request":10},"age_days":708,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-10-04T13:46:37+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:15:46+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":30,"support_request":10,"confidence":60,"impact":40,"quick_win":28.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":46483,"project_name":"fetch-service","source":"github","external_id":"383","title":"test(unit): add git object that fails during clone","author":"dariuszd21","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/fetch-service/pull/383","summary":"Test PR for git inspector clone failure case, approved but with unresolved review comment and failing CI. Inactive 288 days.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The PR has an unresolved review comment that the author hasn't addressed in 288 days, and CI checks for unit-tests and snap-build are failing. The lack of author engagement with review feedback for over 9 months indicates the PR is no longer being actively developed.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":15.0,"staleness":85,"complexity":25,"confidence":75},"age_days":506,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-04-24T15:29:22+00:00","updated_at":"2025-11-24T20:43:12+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":25,"support_request":null,"confidence":75,"impact":20,"quick_win":15.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29551,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1827067","title":"need a way to add foreign architecture to sources.list for build-packages/stage-packages","author":"~jdstrand","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1827067","summary":"Feature request (2018) to auto-add foreign-arch lines to sources.list so build-packages/stage-packages like foo:armhf install in LP chroots. Now addressable via the package-repositories feature (per-arch apt repos); issue unlabelled, 0 comments, inactive ~3 years.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The requested capability — adding a foreign architecture to sources.list for build-packages/stage-packages — is now provided by the package-repositories feature, which supports per-architecture apt repos (e.g. architectures: [armhf]) and is covered by spread tests test-foreign-armhf/test-foreign-i386 and the cross-compile task. The issue has had no maintainer interaction, no labels, and no activity for ~1090 days, so the original problem is no longer applicable to current versions.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":20.0,"staleness":85,"complexity":50,"confidence":70,"support_request":15},"age_days":2692,"labels":[],"created_at":"2019-04-30T14:31:55.819352+00:00","updated_at":"2023-09-06T13:06:15.855000+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":50,"support_request":15,"confidence":70,"impact":40,"quick_win":20.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":46478,"project_name":"fetch-service","source":"github","external_id":"221","title":"create a cache for the unpacked git repositories","author":"dariuszd21","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/fetch-service/issues/221","summary":"Feature request to cache unpacked git repositories to avoid redundant unpacking by inspectors. Created 720 days ago, last activity 389 days ago, no maintainer triage.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has been inactive for 389 days with no maintainer triage or progress. While it's a valid feature request about caching unpacked git repositories, the lack of engagement over 720 days suggests it's not a current priority. The referenced internal Jira ticket (CRAFT-3402) may have been handled separately or abandoned.","scores":{"impact":55,"quick_win":30.25,"staleness":85,"complexity":45,"confidence":65,"support_request":10},"age_days":723,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-09-19T14:02:24+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:15:47+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":45,"support_request":10,"confidence":65,"impact":55,"quick_win":30.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":39798,"project_name":"craft-providers","source":"github","external_id":"684","title":"Create a generic craft LXD profile","author":"dilyn-corner","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-providers/issues/684","summary":"Enhancement to create a generic craft LXD profile to protect managed containers from user-specific profile modifications affecting build reproducibility. Open 694 days with no maintainer response.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"No maintainer has responded to or acknowledged this issue despite it being open for 694 days. The issue is a valid enhancement request about build reproducibility, but requires maintainer assessment to determine priority and implementation approach. The related issue craft-providers#213 (also open 3.5 years) suggests this area has been discussed but not acted on.","scores":{"impact":60,"quick_win":27.0,"staleness":85,"complexity":55,"confidence":60,"support_request":15},"age_days":702,"labels":["Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2024-10-10T22:04:57+00:00","updated_at":"2026-04-22T02:48:39+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":55,"support_request":15,"confidence":60,"impact":60,"quick_win":27.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":30035,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"2103599","title":"Snap installation fails though library dependencies are in snap","author":"~maciek-borzecki","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2103599","summary":"Snap installation fails on riscv64 when shared libraries in stage-packages cannot be loaded at runtime. No maintainer response in 518 days.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"This is a legitimate bug report about shared library loading on riscv64, but has received no maintainer engagement in 518 days and has no labels or assignee. The reporter provided concrete error logs and reproduction context. Without evidence that the issue has been fixed or is no longer relevant, it requires triage to determine if this is still reproducible on current snapcraft versions.","scores":{"impact":60,"quick_win":30.0,"staleness":85,"complexity":50,"confidence":40,"support_request":15},"age_days":542,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-03-19T10:38:46.239992+00:00","updated_at":"2025-04-04T16:08:02.152775+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":50,"support_request":15,"confidence":40,"impact":60,"quick_win":30.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":30030,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"2097440","title":"override-prime disables primed-stage-packages","author":"~valentin.david","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2097440","summary":"Bug report: using override-prime in a part causes primed-stage-packages to be empty in the manifest, even when stage-packages are specified. Untriaged, 576 days old.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has zero maintainer comments, no labels, and no assignee, indicating it has not yet been triaged. The bug report is clear with a minimal reproduction case showing that override-prime causes primed-stage-packages to be empty in the manifest. Code analysis in craft-parts/part_handler.py confirms the logic: _get_primed_stage_packages is called with contents.partitions_contents which tracks files from the override-prime step, but files from stage-packages installed during the stage step may not be included in that tracking.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":22.5,"staleness":85,"complexity":55,"confidence":65,"support_request":15},"age_days":584,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-02-05T14:34:29.093314+00:00","updated_at":"2025-02-17T10:37:44.024470+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":55,"support_request":15,"confidence":65,"impact":50,"quick_win":22.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29883,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1995488","title":"Cannot generate new credentials (snapcraft 7.2.2->4)","author":"~sfljami","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1995488","summary":"Bug: snapcraft login fails when SNAPCRAFT_STORE_CREDENTIALS is set; never triaged, 1401 days old","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no maintainer response, and no assignee, indicating it has never been triaged. Despite being 1401 days old, it represents a legitimate bug that needs maintainer assessment to determine if the error message and behavior still exist in the current version of snapcraft.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"staleness":85,"complexity":40,"confidence":60,"support_request":20},"age_days":1410,"labels":[],"created_at":"2022-11-02T13:21:48.017630+00:00","updated_at":"2022-11-02T13:24:46.991150+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":40,"support_request":20,"confidence":60,"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":12417,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"656","title":"docs: add a reference page about the Application","author":"lengau","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/pull/656","summary":"Adds docs/reference/application.rst documenting the Application and AppMetadata classes. 558 days old, 0 comments, 0 reviewers, no CI. The file now exists in main, suggesting it was merged or superseded.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The PR is 558 days old with zero comments, zero reviewers, and no CI activity. The target file docs/reference/application.rst already exists in the current main branch (last touched by commit 7f1efa40), indicating the content was either merged via another path or the file was added independently. The PR's original purpose is already fulfilled in the codebase, making it stale and no longer applicable.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":85,"complexity":10,"confidence":70},"age_days":570,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-02-20T02:41:46+00:00","updated_at":"2025-02-20T02:41:52+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":10,"support_request":null,"confidence":70,"impact":20,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29981,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"2046156","title":"Fails to parse build output and freezes indefinitely ","author":"~ricotz","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2046156","summary":"UnicodeDecodeError crash when parsing malformed build output, causing snapcraft to freeze. This appears to be the same issue as #4515 which was already fixed.","suggested_action":"close_not_a_bug","suggested_action_reason":"This issue describes a UnicodeDecodeError crash when parsing build output, which matches the identical issue #4515 that was already fixed. The maintainer patched the decoding logic and closed #4515 as resolved. The freeze was a downstream effect of the crash, not a separate issue.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":35.0,"staleness":85,"complexity":30,"confidence":80,"support_request":0},"age_days":1006,"labels":[],"created_at":"2023-12-11T11:43:50.382415+00:00","updated_at":"2024-01-10T14:51:20.003910+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":85,"complexity":30,"support_request":0,"confidence":80,"impact":50,"quick_win":35.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":4825,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"850","title":"docs: add references to lifecycle and part properties","author":"alesancor1","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/pull/850","summary":"Docs PR adding lifecycle and part properties cross-references; 521 days old, changes requested with 4 unresolved comments, companion craft-parts PR rejected, docs since restructured to include these references via common craft-parts mechanism.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The PR is 521 days old with no activity in 381 days, has changes_requested with 4 unresolved comments and zero author response. The companion PR canonical/craft-parts#1053 was closed/rejected by maintainers, and the rockcraft docs have since been restructured (feat(docs): pull in content from craft-parts, refactor(docs): use more docs from craft-parts) to include lifecycle and part_properties references via the /common/craft-parts/ mechanism, making this PR's approach obsolete.","scores":{"impact":10,"quick_win":9.0,"staleness":82,"complexity":10,"confidence":80},"age_days":533,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-03-28T16:45:30+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:12:47+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":82,"complexity":10,"support_request":null,"confidence":80,"impact":10,"quick_win":9.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":7649,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"4227","title":"Autodetect credentials","author":"abitrolly","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/4227","summary":"Request to auto-detect candid (OAuth) store credentials without SNAPCRAFT_STORE_AUTH=candid. Candid login was removed in Snapcraft 9.0 (PR #6288), making the request moot; issue inactive since 2023 with only a bot comment.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is inactive (last activity 494 days ago, only an autogenerated Jira-sync bot comment) and is no longer applicable: the candid login flow it targets was removed in Snapcraft 9.0 by commit 0beb18c4f (PR #6288), and current code in snapcraft/commands/account.py explicitly rejects SNAPCRAFT_STORE_AUTH=candid as 'no longer supported', so auto-detecting candid credentials is moot.","scores":{"impact":10,"quick_win":7.0,"staleness":82,"complexity":30,"confidence":85,"support_request":10},"age_days":1178,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2023-06-23T05:01:21+00:00","updated_at":"2025-04-24T14:07:00+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":82,"complexity":30,"support_request":10,"confidence":85,"impact":10,"quick_win":7.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":21695,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1391","title":"Fix the use of go-use (Go Workspaces) when using dependencies that include `replace <dep> => <relative path` in the go.mod file","author":"atandrewlee","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/pull/1391","summary":"Fixes go-use failing on deps with relative `replace` directives in go.mod by resolving symlinks to absolute paths. Changes requested; author abandoned this approach and opened PR #1466 implementing the maintainer-endorsed 'comment out replace' fix instead.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The author explicitly stated 'I created a new PR #1466 which implements the comment out of those replace statements by the go-use plugin' after maintainer tigarmo recommended removing/commenting out the conflicting replace directives rather than the symlink-resolution approach this PR uses. This PR is therefore superseded by #1466 (still open), has been inactive for 192 days, and carries a changes_requested review with 3 unresolved comments, so it is no longer the path forward.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":82,"complexity":60,"confidence":78},"age_days":310,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-11-06T19:04:42+00:00","updated_at":"2026-02-20T19:25:40+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":82,"complexity":60,"support_request":null,"confidence":78,"impact":45,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":15604,"project_name":"snapcraft-rocks","source":"github","external_id":"106","title":"chore(deps): update docker/login-action action to v3.7.0 (core22-7)","author":"renovate[bot]","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft-rocks/pull/106","summary":"Renovate bot PR bumping docker/login-action v3.5.0 to v3.7.0 on core22-7 branch. 336 days old, no maintainer engagement, CI partially failing. Current workflow no longer uses docker/login-action or targets core22 branches.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The current build-rock.yaml workflow only triggers on core2[24]-[78] branches and uses only actions/checkout@v4 and canonical/craft-actions/rockcraft-pack@main — docker/login-action is no longer referenced anywhere in the repo. The PR targets core22-7, a branch that is no longer in the workflow's scope, making the update moot. Additionally, 336 days of inactivity with 0 comments and 0 reviewers, plus failing self-hosted CI, confirm this is no longer actionable.","scores":{"impact":5,"quick_win":4.75,"staleness":82,"complexity":5,"confidence":75},"age_days":348,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-09-29T11:50:28+00:00","updated_at":"2026-04-08T15:55:34+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":true,"staleness":82,"complexity":5,"support_request":null,"confidence":75,"impact":5,"quick_win":4.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":21841,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1244","title":"maven-use plugin: Support `disable-parallel` parameter","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/1244","summary":"Feature request to add the disable-parallel part property to the maven-use plugin. Labeled 'Needs information' by the maintainer, who asked for a real-world use case; no comments or use case provided in 12 months.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is labeled 'Status: Needs information' and its own body says it is 'extremely low priority until someone shows us a real-world use case', but 363 days have passed with 0 comments and no use case ever provided. The maintainer's request for information went unanswered well beyond the 6-month window, so closing as stale is appropriate; it can be reopened if a concrete failing parallel build is demonstrated.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":12.0,"staleness":82,"complexity":20,"confidence":80,"support_request":5},"age_days":375,"labels":["Type: Enhancement","Status: Needs information"],"created_at":"2025-09-02T15:26:16+00:00","updated_at":"2025-09-02T15:26:16+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":82,"complexity":20,"support_request":5,"confidence":80,"impact":15,"quick_win":12.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":21842,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1243","title":"maven plugin: Support `disable-parallel` parameter","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/1243","summary":"Feature request to add the disable-parallel part property to the maven plugin. Labeled 'Needs information' - maintainer awaits a real-world use case. No activity for ~12 months; the maven plugin still lacks the property.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is labeled 'Status: Needs information' and the maintainer explicitly stated it is 'extremely low priority until someone shows us a real-world use case' - no such use case has appeared in 363 days of inactivity with zero comments, well past the 6-month threshold. The maven plugin source confirms the property is still absent, but the request is blocked on external input that never materialized; it can be reopened if a real-world case emerges.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":11.25,"staleness":82,"complexity":25,"confidence":80,"support_request":5},"age_days":375,"labels":["Type: Enhancement","Status: Needs information"],"created_at":"2025-09-02T15:26:08+00:00","updated_at":"2025-09-02T15:26:08+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":82,"complexity":25,"support_request":5,"confidence":80,"impact":15,"quick_win":11.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":21835,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1250","title":"rust plugin: Support `disable-parallel` parameter","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/1250","summary":"Feature request to add the disable-parallel part property to the rust plugin. Labeled 'Needs information' — maintainer awaits a real-world use case before implementing. No activity for 363 days; rust plugin still lacks the property.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is labeled 'Status: Needs information' and the body explicitly requests a real-world use case ('extremely low priority until someone shows us a real-world use case'), but 363 days have passed with zero comments and no use case provided — far beyond the 6-month threshold. The rust plugin still lacks disable_parallel (only autotools has it, per PR #1167), so it is not fixed, but the requested information never arrived and the maintainer has deprioritized it.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":12.75,"staleness":82,"complexity":15,"confidence":78,"support_request":10},"age_days":375,"labels":["Type: Enhancement","Status: Needs information"],"created_at":"2025-09-02T15:27:23+00:00","updated_at":"2025-09-02T15:27:23+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":82,"complexity":15,"support_request":10,"confidence":78,"impact":15,"quick_win":12.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":22059,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1026","title":"Part's source directory needs to be read-only","author":"vpa1977","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/1026","summary":"Feature request to make part source directories read-only so build steps cannot modify sources and cause inconsistent rebuilds. No labels, no comments, no maintainer activity in ~550 days; no read-only enforcement found in current code.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, zero comments, and no maintainer acknowledgement in 550 days, so it has never been triaged. It is not a candidate for close_stale because the underlying concern (writable source dirs) still applies to the current code, and it is not a support question. Making sources read-only is a significant design decision (many build systems do in-source builds and would break), so it needs maintainer assessment before any work.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":11.25,"staleness":82,"complexity":75,"confidence":78,"support_request":10},"age_days":562,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-02-27T23:12:26+00:00","updated_at":"2025-03-11T14:28:37+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":82,"complexity":75,"support_request":10,"confidence":78,"impact":45,"quick_win":11.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":21675,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1412","title":"Test qa.yaml with starflow PR #101 changes","author":"Copilot","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/pull/1412","summary":"Temporary cross-repo validation PR pinning qa.yaml starflow workflow refs to the @copilot/use-pristine-ubuntu-action branch (starflow PR #101) instead of @main. 268 days old, no activity in 266 days, failing CI; current qa.yaml already uses @main.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The PR is explicitly 'temporary for cross-repo validation' of starflow PR #101, is 268 days old with no activity in 266 days, and the current .github/workflows/qa.yaml already references starflow workflows at @main for all jobs — so the temporary branch-pinning it introduces is no longer applicable. It also fails CI broadly (test-common, test-java/python/other-plugins, lint/files, Conventional Commits, OSV-scanner), and the maintainer's only request (use branch name) was already addressed before it went silent.","scores":{"impact":5,"quick_win":4.5,"staleness":82,"complexity":10,"confidence":78},"age_days":280,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-12-06T16:11:58+00:00","updated_at":"2025-12-08T21:07:21+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":true,"staleness":82,"complexity":10,"support_request":null,"confidence":78,"impact":5,"quick_win":4.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":4945,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"730","title":"improve error messages for LXC operations","author":"cjdcordeiro","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/730","summary":"Request to improve LXC error messages so root causes (e.g. disk space) surface without trace verbosity. Filed by a maintainer, open ~22 months with no labels, comments, or maintainer response. The failing copy error originates in craft-providers, not rockcraft.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no assignee, and zero comments or maintainer acknowledgement in ~22 months, so it shows no sign of having been categorised or prioritised. It is not a candidate for close_stale because the underlying code (craft_providers/lxd/lxc.py copy() still raising 'Failed to copy instance ...' with details only surfaced at trace level) is unchanged and the request remains valid. It is a genuine enhancement, not a support question, so it needs triage and likely a cross-repo handoff to craft-providers.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":19.25,"staleness":82,"complexity":45,"confidence":72,"support_request":15},"age_days":701,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-10-11T11:41:59+00:00","updated_at":"2024-10-11T11:41:59+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":82,"complexity":45,"support_request":15,"confidence":72,"impact":35,"quick_win":19.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":1767,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2369","title":"charmcract pack stuck at `Pausing control of the terminal`","author":"yhaliaw","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/2369","summary":"charmcraft pack hangs ~30 min at 'Pausing control of the terminal' during LXD container build; reporter says it happened once; maintainer asked for reproducibility details, no response for 381 days.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer @lengau asked on 2025-07-11 whether the hang was reproducible and if 'charmcraft clean' resolved it; the reporter, who noted it happened only once, never responded. The issue has been inactive for 381 days with no further diagnostic information, making it unactionable.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":15.75,"staleness":80,"complexity":65,"confidence":65,"support_request":15},"age_days":430,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-07-10T02:16:37+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:17:46+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":80,"complexity":65,"support_request":15,"confidence":65,"impact":45,"quick_win":15.75,"has_related_links":false},{"id":27947,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1676186","title":"the build scriptlet doesn't take into account the source-subdir","author":"~elopio","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1676186","summary":"Build/install scriptlets run from the build dir instead of honoring source-subdir, forcing manual cd/cp. Open since 2017, 0 comments, no labels/assignee; fix is delicate due to backward-compat break risk. Needs triage.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has 0 comments, no labels, no assignee, and no maintainer response in ~999 days of last activity, showing no triage. The reporter (elopio, a maintainer) explicitly flags the fix as 'a little delicate because it will break the parts with subdir and scriptlets', indicating a real backward-compat concern that needs a maintainer decision rather than auto-closing. It is a genuine feature/bug report, not a support request.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":20.25,"staleness":80,"complexity":55,"confidence":55,"support_request":10},"age_days":3457,"labels":["scripts","sources"],"created_at":"2017-03-26T16:02:24.360030+00:00","updated_at":"2023-12-06T15:33:09.980423+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":80,"complexity":55,"support_request":10,"confidence":55,"impact":45,"quick_win":20.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":22165,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"920","title":"feat: add \"craftctl chroot\" command","author":"linostar","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/pull/920","summary":"Adds a craftctl chroot command to run commands inside the part's chroot. Small diff (+114/-2, 3 files). Pending review with 0 reviewers; a maintainer called it useful, but no activity for ~20 months and the overlay chroot code has since been reworked.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"The sole comment is sergiusens' 'this looks very useful' (2024-12-11) with 0 reviewers, no CI, and last activity 628 days ago. The chroot command still does not exist in craft_parts/ctl.py (only default/set/get are handled), so the PR is not obsolete, but the overlay chroot execution was reworked since (e.g. #1567, #1672), so a maintainer review is needed to decide whether the author will update it.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":24.75,"staleness":80,"complexity":45,"confidence":72},"age_days":649,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-12-03T08:29:48+00:00","updated_at":"2024-12-11T13:53:34+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":80,"complexity":45,"support_request":null,"confidence":72,"impact":45,"quick_win":24.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":12719,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"354","title":"Prefer `--use-lxd` over `CRAFT_BUILD_ENVIRONMENT`","author":"mr-cal","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/issues/354","summary":"CLI flag --use-lxd is ignored when CRAFT_BUILD_ENVIRONMENT=host is set; _use_provider() in lifecycle.py doesn't check the flag before the env var. Untriaged, no labels or maintainer response; bug still present in current code.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"No labels, no maintainer comments (only a Jira sync bot), and no assignee — the issue has not been assessed. The bug is confirmed still present: _use_provider() (lifecycle.py:116) returns False when build_environment == 'host' without first checking parsed_args.use_lxd, so CRAFT_BUILD_ENVIRONMENT=host testcraft pack --use-lxd runs locally instead of in LXD.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":31.5,"staleness":80,"complexity":30,"confidence":75,"support_request":10},"age_days":834,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-05-31T17:40:02+00:00","updated_at":"2025-05-23T17:27:01+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":80,"complexity":30,"support_request":10,"confidence":75,"impact":45,"quick_win":31.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":6918,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"4960","title":"Can't build Core20 snaps on non-snap distros","author":"dstathis","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/4960","summary":"Core20 snap builds fail on non-snap distros (NixOS) due to LXD snap detection. Triaged with a proposed backport fix, but core20 support and snapcraft_legacy have since been removed from the project, making the issue no longer applicable.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"Core20 support was explicitly dropped in commit fa7952b4d ('chore!: drop core20 (#6019)') and snapcraft_legacy was removed in ffb164b7a, eliminating the code path that needed the backport fix. The issue is no longer applicable to the current codebase.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":13.75,"staleness":80,"complexity":45,"confidence":82,"support_request":10},"age_days":760,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Bug"],"created_at":"2024-08-13T14:03:48+00:00","updated_at":"2025-04-28T14:45:27+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":80,"complexity":45,"support_request":10,"confidence":82,"impact":25,"quick_win":13.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":22066,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1019","title":"Allow platform-independent builds with the \"all\" architecture","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/1019","summary":"Feature request to allow 'all' as a build-for architecture in ProjectInfo for platform-independent builds, with per-plugin checks. Unimplemented; counterpart requests in craft-application and snapcraft were closed without implementation or rejected.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has had zero comments and no activity for ~14.5 months, and the code still rejects 'all' via InvalidArchitecture in infos.py. More decisively, the counterpart requests are dead: craft-application#360 was closed without implementation and snapcraft#4603 was closed with build-for 'all' explicitly rejected for core24 in favor of architecture-specific builds, so the consuming projects no longer intend to pursue this.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":12.25,"staleness":80,"complexity":65,"confidence":70,"support_request":0},"age_days":570,"labels":["Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2025-02-20T00:39:01+00:00","updated_at":"2025-06-13T13:42:28+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":80,"complexity":65,"support_request":0,"confidence":70,"impact":35,"quick_win":12.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":6763,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"5116","title":"Add authentication support to apt repositories","author":"cparich","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/5116","summary":"Feature request: add auth.conf.d-style authentication support for type: apt package-repositories, since embedding credentials in the URI leaks secrets into build logs and long keys cause errors. Open 685 days, no labels, no maintainer response, no related PR found.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is a well-scoped feature request (auth.conf.d support for apt package-repositories) with a concrete pain point (secret leakage in logs, 'File name too long' with JFrog keys), but it has no labels, no maintainer comments, and no linked PR after 685 days. Code inspection confirms no auth.conf handling exists in snapcraft or craft-parts' repo.install path, so it is not implemented. It needs maintainer triage to decide scope (likely a craft-parts API change plus snapcraft schema/docs).","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":22.5,"staleness":80,"complexity":55,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":697,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-10-15T14:48:31+00:00","updated_at":"2024-10-15T14:48:31+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":80,"complexity":55,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":50,"quick_win":22.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":6735,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"5144","title":"error out if core24 classic python snap is created with the non-staged python binary","author":"dariuszd21","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/5144","summary":"Feature request to add a post_prime check in the python plugin that errors when a core24 classic snap is built with the host python (/usr/bin/python*) instead of a staged interpreter, which produces a broken pyvenv.cfg (home = /usr/bin). No labels, no comments, no activity for ~2 years.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction in 655 days, so it has never been triaged. The underlying problem is still relevant: python_common.py's get_system_interpreter() returns None for classic confinement, and craft-parts' base.py only errors when no staged interpreter is found at all — it does not detect the case where a partial python (e.g. python3.12-minimal without the python3 symlink) causes the venv to be created with the build host python, leaving pyvenv.cfg with home = /usr/bin. The existing python-symlinks spread tests (classic-not-provisioned) confirm the 'not found' path is covered, but the 'wrong interpreter used' path described here is not, so the request is still valid and needs a maintainer to scope it.","scores":{"impact":55,"quick_win":30.25,"staleness":80,"complexity":45,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":667,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-11-14T21:56:26+00:00","updated_at":"2024-11-14T22:04:08+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":80,"complexity":45,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":55,"quick_win":30.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":5065,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"610","title":"Python plugin: incompatibilities with python-packages attribute, build-packages and at least `libpq-dev`","author":"javierdelapuente","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/610","summary":"Rockcraft python plugin fails to build C-extension packages (e.g. psycopg2) when python-packages is set, because the venv lacks Python.h; workaround is adding pip/setuptools/wheel to python-packages. No maintainer resolution; last activity 798 days ago.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no assignee, and no maintainer decision — only a request for the full log, which the reporter provided via pastebin links. The root cause is a real plugin bug: craft-parts' PythonPlugin defaults python-packages to [pip, setuptools, wheel], so specifying any python-packages (e.g. gunicorn) drops wheel, and the log shows 'Using legacy setup.py install for psycopg2, since package wheel is not installed' followed by a Python.h failure. The issue is old (798 days) but the underlying venv/pip behavior in craft-parts may have changed, so it needs a maintainer to reproduce on a current release before closing.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":22.5,"staleness":80,"complexity":55,"confidence":60,"support_request":15},"age_days":810,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-06-24T11:33:51+00:00","updated_at":"2024-06-24T12:08:08+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":80,"complexity":55,"support_request":15,"confidence":60,"impact":50,"quick_win":22.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":39856,"project_name":"craft-providers","source":"github","external_id":"794","title":"Warn if requested specs don't match the existing instance","author":"bepri","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-providers/issues/794","summary":"Enhancement request to warn when requested instance specs don't match existing hardware. Stale after maintainer asked for elaboration with no response for 378 days.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"A maintainer (@lengau) requested elaboration on 2025-08-12, but no response has been provided in over 378 days. The enhancement request lacks specific implementation details and has been inactive for over a year, meeting the criteria for closing due to lack of response after maintainer request for details.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":19.25,"staleness":80,"complexity":45,"confidence":70,"support_request":15},"age_days":396,"labels":["Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2025-08-12T17:16:10+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-22T21:58:50+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":80,"complexity":45,"support_request":15,"confidence":70,"impact":35,"quick_win":19.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":5084,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"591","title":"Errors should have links to our documentation","author":"sergiusens","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/591","summary":"Feature request to add documentation links to rockcraft error messages. Open 803 days, no labels, only an auto-generated Jira sync comment (CRAFT-3039); no maintainer triage or code changes addressing it.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no assignee, and the only comment is the 2024-06-19 auto-generated Jira sync (CRAFT-3039) — no maintainer has assessed or prioritized it in ~2.2 years. It is not safe to close as stale because the underlying request (error messages linking to docs) is still applicable: rockcraft/application.py defines docs_url but a grep of rockcraft/ shows no error messages embedding documentation links, and no commit references this issue. A maintainer should decide whether to scope it (which errors, which doc pages) or close it as superseded.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":22.0,"staleness":80,"complexity":45,"confidence":65,"support_request":10},"age_days":815,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-06-19T19:04:57+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:12:51+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":80,"complexity":45,"support_request":10,"confidence":65,"impact":40,"quick_win":22.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":13626,"project_name":"craft-cli","source":"github","external_id":"114","title":"Present long/short options separated in the options table for markdown formatted help","author":"facundobatista","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-cli/issues/114","summary":"Request to render short and long CLI options in separate columns of the markdown help options table (e.g. | -v | --verbose | desc |) instead of combined '-v, --verbose'. Unlabelled, zero comments, and the current code still uses the combined format.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no comments, and no assignee, showing no sign of categorisation, so it needs triage. It is not stale-closable: I verified craft_cli/helptexts.py's _build_markdown_command_help still emits the combined format (tests expect '| `-h, --help` | ... |'), so the request remains applicable. It is a low-priority cosmetic formatting suggestion, so impact is minimal.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":11.25,"staleness":80,"complexity":25,"confidence":80,"support_request":0},"age_days":1499,"labels":[],"created_at":"2022-08-05T17:21:21+00:00","updated_at":"2025-03-10T18:59:12+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":80,"complexity":25,"support_request":0,"confidence":80,"impact":15,"quick_win":11.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":5113,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"562","title":"bug: run umoci in --rootless mode","author":"cjdcordeiro","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/562","summary":"umoci unpack fails with permission error when Rockcraft runs as nonroot user with --destructive-mode; extract_to() has a rootless param but image.py never passes it, so the bug persists in current code","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"No labels, no maintainer comments, no assignee after 846 days. The bug is still present: rockcraft/services/image.py:94 calls base_image.extract_to(bundle_dir) without rootless=True, even though oci.py:176-191 already supports the --rootless flag. The issue is a valid, reproducible bug (clear error output and code reference) that simply was never triaged.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":29.25,"staleness":80,"complexity":35,"confidence":75,"support_request":10},"age_days":858,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-05-07T10:15:04+00:00","updated_at":"2024-05-07T10:15:04+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":80,"complexity":35,"support_request":10,"confidence":75,"impact":45,"quick_win":29.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":15653,"project_name":"snapcraft-rocks","source":"github","external_id":"57","title":"Service \"snapcraft\" stopped unexpectedly with code 70","author":"abitrolly","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft-rocks/issues/57","summary":"Snapcraft OCI image pebble service exits with code 70. Debugging revealed leftover build artifacts in the mounted project dir as the cause; user resolved it by cleaning up and setting SNAPCRAFT_BUILD_ENVIRONMENT=host. Follow-ups filed as #58-#60. Still open, unlabelled.","suggested_action":"close_not_a_bug","suggested_action_reason":"The reporter confirmed the image works after removing leftover build artifacts (parts/prime/snap/stage and the stale .snap) and setting SNAPCRAFT_BUILD_ENVIRONMENT=host, so the reported failure was a user-environment issue, not an image bug. The remaining improvement asks (better error messages, env vars in the image, WORKDIR) were explicitly split into follow-up issues #58, #59, and #60, which are still open and unlabelled, so nothing actionable is left in this issue itself.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":10.5,"staleness":80,"complexity":30,"confidence":80,"support_request":70},"age_days":718,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-09-24T10:31:10+00:00","updated_at":"2024-09-24T16:19:10+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":80,"complexity":30,"support_request":70,"confidence":80,"impact":15,"quick_win":10.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":21850,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1235","title":"dotnet plugin: Support `disable-parallel` parameter","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/1235","summary":"Request to add the disable-parallel part property to the dotnet plugin. Labeled Needs information; the maintainer marked it extremely low priority pending a real-world use case, which has not been provided in 363 days.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The maintainer (author) explicitly stated this is 'extremely low priority until someone shows us a real-world use case,' and the 'Status: Needs information' label confirms it is waiting for that use case. 363 days have passed with zero comments and no use case provided, far beyond the 6-month threshold for closing an issue awaiting reporter input.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":10.5,"staleness":80,"complexity":30,"confidence":75,"support_request":5},"age_days":375,"labels":["Type: Enhancement","Status: Needs information"],"created_at":"2025-09-02T15:23:56+00:00","updated_at":"2025-09-02T15:23:56+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":80,"complexity":30,"support_request":5,"confidence":75,"impact":15,"quick_win":10.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":4567,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"1108","title":"docs: make package-slices.svg readable in dark mode","author":"gcomneno","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/pull/1108","summary":"Docs fix restyling package-slices.svg with neutral greys for dark-mode readability. Approved by 2 reviewers, but closed as superseded by replacement PR #1108, which implements the same fix and is ready to merge.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The tracker records #1107 as closed and 'Superseded by PR #1108', which is open, approved by two reviewers, and implements the identical SVG fix, so this PR is no longer applicable. The author's final comment (2026-03-23) confirms disengagement, and the only failing check (snap-tests) was confirmed by maintainer @asanvaq as a persistent, unrelated failure affecting all PRs.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":14.25,"staleness":80,"complexity":5,"confidence":80},"age_days":199,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-02-25T17:22:06+00:00","updated_at":"2026-03-23T18:06:46+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":80,"complexity":5,"support_request":null,"confidence":80,"impact":15,"quick_win":14.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":4867,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"808","title":"improve `entrypoint-service` warning message","author":"cjdcordeiro","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/808","summary":"Rockcraft's entrypoint-service warning incorrectly calls the OCI entrypoint 'atypical' when it is the rock's entrypoint that is atypical. The message is unchanged in current code; no labels, comments, or activity in ~19 months.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no comments, no assignee, and no maintainer triage activity despite being filed by a maintainer. The underlying problem is still live: MESSAGE_ENTRYPOINT_CHANGED in rockcraft/models/project.py:56 still reads 'atypical OCI Entrypoint' at HEAD, so the work is valid but uncategorised. It is not close_stale because the reported problem is still reproducible in current code.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":13.5,"staleness":80,"complexity":10,"confidence":80,"support_request":5},"age_days":582,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-02-07T16:23:21+00:00","updated_at":"2025-02-07T16:23:21+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":80,"complexity":10,"support_request":5,"confidence":80,"impact":15,"quick_win":13.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":4961,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"714","title":"remove support for i386","author":"cjdcordeiro","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/714","summary":"Maintainer-filed task to drop i386 (Intel 386) from rockcraft's supported architectures, since Ubuntu dropped it after Bionic. Still open with no labels, comments, or assignee; i386 remains in architectures.py, the schema, and spread test yamls.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue (canonical/rockcraft#714) has no labels, no comments, and no assignee, showing no sign of categorization or prioritization despite being filed by a maintainer 705 days ago. I confirmed i386 is still present in rockcraft/architectures.py (SUPPORTED_ARCHS), schema/rockcraft.json, and two spread test yamls, so the task remains valid and applicable rather than stale-irrelevant, but it needs triage to be scoped and prioritized.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":13.0,"staleness":80,"complexity":35,"confidence":78,"support_request":0},"age_days":717,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-09-25T12:20:09+00:00","updated_at":"2024-09-25T12:20:09+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":80,"complexity":35,"support_request":0,"confidence":78,"impact":20,"quick_win":13.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":4839,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"836","title":"docs: add diff aside from sed to clarify tutorials","author":"alesancor1","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/pull/836","summary":"Adds git diff/sed tabs to tutorial chiselling sections. Targets the Flask tutorial 'Chisel the rock' section, which has since been removed from tutorials and moved to how-to guides. No reviewer engagement in 263 days.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The PR targets the 'Chisel the rock' section of the Flask tutorial (per the readthedocs preview URL), but that section was removed from tutorials in #1151 (Flask/Django), #1330 (FastAPI), and #1222 (dedicated chisel tutorial). Chiselling content now lives in docs/how-to/chiseling/. The PR's target content no longer exists in the tutorials it was modifying.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":12.0,"staleness":80,"complexity":20,"confidence":82},"age_days":542,"labels":["Type: Documentation"],"created_at":"2025-03-19T11:02:45+00:00","updated_at":"2025-12-11T15:55:16+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":80,"complexity":20,"support_request":null,"confidence":82,"impact":15,"quick_win":12.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":4701,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"974","title":"refactor: consolidate base-specific knowledge","author":"tigarmo","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/pull/974","summary":"Refactors Rockcraft to consolidate base-specific knowledge (support, pebble, plugins) into a single 'bases' module. Open 346 days with no activity, 2 unresolved review comments, no assigned reviewer, and a failing lint check.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"The PR carries 2 unresolved review comments and has no assigned reviewer after 346 days of inactivity. The underlying goal remains valid—base-specific knowledge is still scattered across project.py (BaseT literals), architectures.py, and pebble logic—but the codebase has evolved significantly (new bases ubuntu@26.04/26.10, stonking) and the failing lint/files check indicates the diff needs updating before a meaningful review can occur.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":19.25,"staleness":80,"complexity":45,"confidence":65},"age_days":358,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-09-19T19:11:14+00:00","updated_at":"2025-09-19T19:24:44+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":80,"complexity":45,"support_request":null,"confidence":65,"impact":35,"quick_win":19.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":15922,"project_name":"starbase","source":"github","external_id":"323","title":"Add a description for `feature/<description>` branches","author":"upils","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/starbase/issues/323","summary":"Docs gap: HACKING.rst does not explain the feature/<description> branch flow. Open 592 days with zero comments; merged PR #218 documents branch naming conventions, likely resolving it.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has had no activity for 462 days and zero comments, and merged PR canonical/starbase#218 ('docs(HACKING): document branch names and changelog') added 92 lines to the HACKING file covering branch naming conventions — the exact documentation this issue requested. The requested feature was implemented elsewhere, so the issue is no longer applicable. Caveat: I could not directly inspect HACKING.rst (no pinned SHA for repo tools), so a maintainer should confirm PR #218 covers feature branches before closing.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":80,"complexity":10,"confidence":65,"support_request":10},"age_days":605,"labels":["Type: Documentation"],"created_at":"2025-01-16T08:21:50+00:00","updated_at":"2025-05-26T13:39:31+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":80,"complexity":10,"support_request":10,"confidence":65,"impact":20,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29906,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"2002405","title":"\"snapcraft plugins\" (latest/stable) chokes on parsing \"extensions\" line","author":"~rpjday","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2002405","summary":"Snapcraft 7.2.9 fails to parse snapcraft.yaml with extensions field, throwing pydantic validation error about extra fields in apps configuration","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has zero maintainer comments and no visible triage labels beyond 'craft-1567'. While the bug report includes a clear traceback showing extensions being incorrectly parsed as an app-level field, the age (1332 days) and lack of follow-up require maintainer assessment to determine if it's still reproducible in current versions.","scores":{"impact":60,"quick_win":36.0,"staleness":80,"complexity":40,"confidence":60,"support_request":10},"age_days":1341,"labels":["craft-1567"],"created_at":"2023-01-10T13:36:01.984219+00:00","updated_at":"2023-01-13T18:39:43.347428+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":80,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":60,"impact":60,"quick_win":36.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29888,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1996206","title":"Linter is checking against host libs when using --build-for argument","author":"~dbruno74","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1996206","summary":"Linter incorrectly checks library dependencies against host architecture libs instead of target architecture when using --build-for cross-compilation flag. No maintainer response after 1393 days.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no maintainer response, no labels, and no assignee after 1393 days. While it describes a valid cross-architecture build bug (LD_LIBRARY_PATH incorrectly includes host architecture paths like /snap/core22/current/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu when checking aarch64 libraries), the project architecture may have changed significantly. A maintainer needs to assess whether this is still reproducible in the current codebase or if the linter functionality has been moved/removed.","scores":{"impact":65,"quick_win":29.25,"staleness":80,"complexity":55,"confidence":35,"support_request":10},"age_days":1402,"labels":[],"created_at":"2022-11-10T15:57:49.573955+00:00","updated_at":"2022-11-10T15:58:38.294734+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":80,"complexity":55,"support_request":10,"confidence":35,"impact":65,"quick_win":29.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":15674,"project_name":"snapcraft-rocks","source":"github","external_id":"36","title":"Add a template for Github issues","author":"tigarmo","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft-rocks/issues/36","summary":"Request to add a GitHub issue template for snapcraft-rocks, suggesting fields like the failing source image (e.g. 7_core22) and the snapcraft.yaml. Filed by a maintainer 867 days ago; no labels, assignee, or comments, and no template has been added since.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue carries no labels, no assignee, and zero comments, showing no sign of categorisation or prioritisation despite being filed by maintainer tigarmo. It is a trivial, valid task (add a .github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE file) that has never been triaged, so it needs triage rather than closure; the template is still absent from the repo, so it is not stale-irrelevant.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":14.25,"staleness":80,"complexity":5,"confidence":75,"support_request":10},"age_days":879,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-04-16T11:25:39+00:00","updated_at":"2024-04-16T11:25:39+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":80,"complexity":5,"support_request":10,"confidence":75,"impact":15,"quick_win":14.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":21963,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1122","title":"craft-parts doesn't track primed files when using `override-prime`","author":"mr-cal","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/1122","summary":"craft-parts writes an empty fileset to prime state when a part uses override-prime, since the scriptlet path in _run_step returns no tracked contents. Bug confirmed still present in current code; unlabelled, no comments; downstream snapcraft issue still open.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no comments, and no assignee, so it shows no sign of being categorised or prioritised despite being filed by a maintainer 447 days ago. I verified the bug is still present in HEAD: _run_step in craft_parts/executor/part_handler.py returns StepContents(stage=step_info.step == Step.STAGE) for scriptlet runs, so override-prime yields empty files/dirs in PrimeState. It should be triaged and prioritised because downstream snapcraft#5552 is still open and explicitly blocked on this.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":24.75,"staleness":80,"complexity":45,"confidence":85,"support_request":0},"age_days":459,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-06-10T16:46:50+00:00","updated_at":"2025-06-10T16:55:49+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":80,"complexity":45,"support_request":0,"confidence":85,"impact":45,"quick_win":24.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29012,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1631407","title":"ugly error when failed to sign because of wrong password","author":"~elopio","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1631407","summary":"Verbose GPG error shown when snapcraft sign-build fails after 3 wrong passphrases. The command was migrated in #6228 and now raises a cleaner SignBuildAssertionError, but the issue remains open with no maintainer response.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 10 years old with zero comments and no labels, so it has never been triaged. However, the sign-build command was migrated in #6228 and now raises a cleaner SignBuildAssertionError (snapcraft/store/errors.py:220) instead of the raw GPG output, so a maintainer should verify whether the original ugly error is still reproducible before closing.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":16.0,"staleness":80,"complexity":20,"confidence":55,"support_request":10},"age_days":3627,"labels":["store"],"created_at":"2016-10-07T14:58:06.876925+00:00","updated_at":"2023-09-20T13:17:55.570617+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":80,"complexity":20,"support_request":10,"confidence":55,"impact":20,"quick_win":16.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":27270,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1921397","title":"Cant build snaps with snapcraft  when snap store is down ","author":"~bugraaydogar","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1921397","summary":"Snapcraft blocks snap rebuilds when the Snap Store is unreachable, forcing developers to use a /run/.containerenv workaround; reporter suggests snapcraft should proceed with the build. Untriaged, 0 comments, last activity ~3.4 years ago.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has 0 comments, no assignee, and no maintainer response in ~5.4 years, with only the area label craft-3, so it shows no sign of having been assessed or prioritized. The related Launchpad bug 1869506 (snapcraft crashes offline) was fixed by handling missing store responses, but that is a distinct crash, not this build-blocking concern, so I cannot confirm the reported behavior is resolved. A maintainer needs to verify whether modern snapcraft still blocks builds when the store is down.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":80,"complexity":60,"confidence":55,"support_request":15},"age_days":1997,"labels":["craft-3"],"created_at":"2021-03-25T15:04:38.354908+00:00","updated_at":"2023-03-21T20:01:29.602245+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":80,"complexity":60,"support_request":15,"confidence":55,"impact":45,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":1628,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2510","title":"CI is failing on the hotfix/2.7 branch","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/2510","summary":"CI failures on the hotfix/2.7 branch, triaged but unresolved. The branch was merged into main via PR #1742 and the project has since advanced to v4.5, making the branch-specific CI issue no longer applicable.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The hotfix/2.7 branch was merged into main via PR #1742 (delivering 2.7.0/2.7.1), and the project has since advanced through 3.4, 3.5, and 4.0–4.5. The branch-specific CI issue is no longer applicable since the branch no longer exists as an active development target. The only recent activity (44 days ago) was an automated Jira ticket creation by a bot, with no maintainer follow-up.","scores":{"impact":10,"quick_win":8.0,"staleness":80,"complexity":20,"confidence":80,"support_request":5},"age_days":281,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Bug"],"created_at":"2025-12-06T03:53:37+00:00","updated_at":"2026-07-15T20:20:33+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":80,"complexity":20,"support_request":5,"confidence":80,"impact":10,"quick_win":8.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":7437,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"4440","title":"snapcraft configure hook fails: segmentation fault","author":"barrettj12","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/4440","summary":"Snapcraft snap's configure hook segfaults on AWS arm64 GitHub runners during install. Maintainer requested diagnostic logs in Dec 2023; reporter never responded. Unlabelled, inactive ~18 months, snap since reworked to core24.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer @mr-cal explicitly requested `snap tasks --last=configure` logs on 2023-12-04 and the reporter never provided them, leaving the issue unactionable for ~18 months (last activity 536 days ago). The snapcraft snap has since been substantially reworked (core22 → core24 migration, new configure-hook shebang handling in fc985d4c5), so the specific 2023 arm64 segfault is very likely no longer reproducible on current releases.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":80,"complexity":55,"confidence":68,"support_request":10},"age_days":1040,"labels":[],"created_at":"2023-11-07T11:47:07+00:00","updated_at":"2025-03-13T18:37:02+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":80,"complexity":55,"support_request":10,"confidence":68,"impact":40,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":5505,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"169","title":"Review SPDX package","author":"tigarmo","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/169","summary":"Rockcraft's SPDX license validation uses spdx-lookup (a stop-gap after spdx-license-list was removed from PyPI), which has an outdated license db. Maintainers discussed options but no resolution was reached; last activity ~2 years ago.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is still relevant: the codebase (rockcraft/models/project.py and pyproject.toml) still depends on spdx-lookup, the stop-gap introduced by PR #168, which has an outdated license db. Maintainers (tigarmo, lengau) actively discussed three options (vendor the file, download at runtime, or use SPDX's tools-python) but no decision was made, and the last comment (2024-07-24) was an unanswered 'Any update?' — so it is triaged and valid, not stale-irrelevant.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":24.75,"staleness":80,"complexity":45,"confidence":75,"support_request":10},"age_days":1366,"labels":[],"created_at":"2022-12-16T11:01:59+00:00","updated_at":"2024-07-24T16:20:16+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":80,"complexity":45,"support_request":10,"confidence":75,"impact":45,"quick_win":24.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":21790,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1295","title":"docs: add more readme flair","author":"lengau","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/pull/1295","summary":"Adds more flair (badges/GIFs) to the craft-parts README; single-file +24/-7 docs change, open 353 days with zero comments, 10 unresolved review comments, and the README has since been rewritten to the Canonical template.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"No activity for ~11.5 months (last activity 348 days ago, 0 comments, review pending with 0 reviewers) and 10 unresolved review comments were never addressed. The target file has since been substantially rewritten (README template update #1199, starbase merge #1253), so the diff against the old README is outdated and no longer applicable; the 3 failing CI jobs are unrelated flaky slow-test runs, not the basis for closing.","scores":{"impact":5,"quick_win":4.75,"staleness":80,"complexity":5,"confidence":80},"age_days":365,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-09-12T23:16:57+00:00","updated_at":"2025-09-17T16:40:23+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":80,"complexity":5,"support_request":null,"confidence":80,"impact":5,"quick_win":4.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":22027,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1058","title":"SCP formatted git source cause infinite loading when packing","author":"alesancor1","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/1058","summary":"Git source with SCP-style URL (github.com:user/repo) hangs forever during pull when the clone would fail, because ssh prompts for host-key confirmation in the managed instance. Untriaged, no maintainer activity for ~17 months; code path still present.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"No labels, no comments, no maintainer interaction in 516 days, so it has never been triaged. The bug is still reproducible in current code: GitSource._clone_new() runs git clone via process_run() (craft_parts/utils/os_utils.py:339) which pipes stdout but leaves stdin interactive, so ssh's host-key prompt ('Are you sure you want to continue connecting?') blocks forever in the managed instance instead of failing fast; the log in the issue shows exactly that prompt followed by an endless 'Pulling test'. A fix (e.g. GIT_SSH_COMMAND with BatchMode=yes or stdin=DEVNULL) is small but needs maintainer acknowledgement first.","scores":{"impact":55,"quick_win":35.75,"staleness":80,"complexity":35,"confidence":70,"support_request":5},"age_days":528,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-04-02T10:50:30+00:00","updated_at":"2025-04-02T10:51:16+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":80,"complexity":35,"support_request":5,"confidence":70,"impact":55,"quick_win":35.75,"has_related_links":false},{"id":30046,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"2139423","title":"Error: saving config file for the container failed","author":"~nteodosio","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2139423","summary":"LXD container fails to start with 'saving config file for the container failed' error during snapcraft build. Untriaged, 217 days old, no maintainer response.","suggested_action":"close_not_a_bug","suggested_action_reason":"The error 'saving config file for the container failed' originates from LXD itself, not from snapcraft. This is an environmental issue (likely disk space, LXD configuration, or corrupted container state) rather than a snapcraft bug. The user should resolve this on their end by checking LXD status, available disk space, and container state.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":14.0,"staleness":80,"complexity":30,"confidence":60,"support_request":80},"age_days":225,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-01-30T13:28:55.372069+00:00","updated_at":"2026-01-30T13:31:25.775819+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":80,"complexity":30,"support_request":80,"confidence":60,"impact":20,"quick_win":14.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":22764,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"318","title":"Provide a way to return all project variables","author":"merlijn-sebrechts","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/318","summary":"Feature request for a craftctl command (e.g. get --all) to list all project variables for debugging. No maintainer response, only an auto-generated Jira sync comment; the feature is still unimplemented in craft_parts/ctl.py.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no assignee, and the only comment is the 2024-05-17 auto-generated Jira sync bot message (CRAFT-2971) — no maintainer has ever assessed it. I verified in current code that craftctl get still requires exactly one key argument (step_handler.py _process_api_commands raises on len(cmd_args) != 1), so the request remains applicable and cannot be closed as stale or resolved.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":13.75,"staleness":80,"complexity":45,"confidence":75,"support_request":10},"age_days":1398,"labels":[],"created_at":"2022-11-14T13:26:03+00:00","updated_at":"2025-03-11T14:29:20+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":80,"complexity":45,"support_request":10,"confidence":75,"impact":25,"quick_win":13.75,"has_related_links":false},{"id":13497,"project_name":"craft-cli","source":"github","external_id":"243","title":"Brief Emitter mode still appears to be verbose when plugins are called ?","author":"flotter","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-cli/issues/243","summary":"Question about whether open_stream() subprocess output should be suppressed in BRIEF emitter mode; moved from craft-parts to craft-cli, meeting scheduled to discuss expected behavior but no resolution recorded; code still shows subprocess output ephemerally in BRIEF mode.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue was moved from craft-parts to craft-cli with a meeting scheduled to resolve the design question (lengau: 'I'm not sure what the correct behaviour here is'), but no resolution was recorded and the code in open_stream() still routes BRIEF-mode subprocess output to sys.stderr with ephemeral=True. It needs a maintainer to decide whether the current ephemeral display is intended or whether BRIEF mode should suppress open_stream() output entirely.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":19.25,"staleness":80,"complexity":45,"confidence":75,"support_request":55},"age_days":923,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-03-03T14:36:48+00:00","updated_at":"2024-04-12T17:59:20+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":80,"complexity":45,"support_request":55,"confidence":75,"impact":35,"quick_win":19.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":39831,"project_name":"craft-providers","source":"github","external_id":"858","title":"Error when setting up almalinux test","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-providers/issues/858","summary":"Test setup failure in almalinux test due to pytest internal KeyError: 'tracemalloc'. Issue is 273 days old with no maintainer response or assignee.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The error is in pytest's internal tracemalloc.py module (KeyError: 'tracemalloc'), not in craft-providers code. Multiple pytest version bumps have occurred since the issue was opened 273 days ago, and the issue has been inactive for 136 days with no maintainer response. This appears to be a pytest internal bug or CI environment issue that has likely been resolved by pytest updates.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":14.0,"staleness":80,"complexity":30,"confidence":50,"support_request":20},"age_days":281,"labels":["Type: Bug"],"created_at":"2025-12-06T03:07:40+00:00","updated_at":"2026-04-22T02:47:46+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":80,"complexity":30,"support_request":20,"confidence":50,"impact":20,"quick_win":14.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":39793,"project_name":"craft-providers","source":"github","external_id":"584","title":"Catch `FileNotFound` for all `subprocess.run()` calls","author":"mr-cal","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-providers/issues/584","summary":"Enhancement to catch FileNotFoundError from subprocess.run calls in LXC and Multipass wrappers, raising ProviderError instead. Unaddressed for over two years.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue describes a valid error-handling improvement that remains applicable, as the LXC and Multipass wrapper methods still call subprocess.run directly without catching FileNotFoundError. It has been inactive for over two years with only a Jira sync comment, so it requires maintainer prioritization rather than immediate closure.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":35.0,"staleness":80,"complexity":30,"confidence":75,"support_request":10},"age_days":814,"labels":["Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2024-06-20T16:39:00+00:00","updated_at":"2026-04-22T02:48:44+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":80,"complexity":30,"support_request":10,"confidence":75,"impact":50,"quick_win":35.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":39792,"project_name":"craft-providers","source":"github","external_id":"582","title":"Add support for Xenial","author":"jugmac00","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-providers/issues/582","summary":"Enhancement request to add Xenial (16.04) support to craft-providers. Xenial is EOL and explicitly marked as failing in integration tests. Maintainer noted the scope is non-trivial.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"Xenial (16.04) is EOL and the codebase explicitly marks it as failing in integration tests (\"Fails to setup snapd (#582)\"). The maintainer noted the scope is \"not trivial\" and has dropped related TODOs in #492, indicating Xenial support is not a priority.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":6.0,"staleness":80,"complexity":80,"confidence":65,"support_request":10},"age_days":816,"labels":["Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2024-06-19T07:36:16+00:00","updated_at":"2026-04-22T02:48:45+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":80,"complexity":80,"support_request":10,"confidence":65,"impact":30,"quick_win":6.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":4789,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"886","title":"Bug: Edgecase:  Error when shellcheck is not installed","author":"RafaelJohn9","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/886","summary":"make lint fails with 'xargs: shellcheck: No such file or directory' when shellcheck is missing; lint-shellcheck lacks an install-shellcheck prerequisite. Still reproducible in current common.mk; unlabelled with no maintainer activity for ~15 months.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"No labels, no comments, no assignee, and no maintainer interaction in 469 days, so it has never been triaged. The bug is still present in the code: common.mk:181 defines lint-shellcheck with no dependency on install-shellcheck (unlike lint-prettier which depends on install-npm), so running make lint without make setup still produces the exact xargs error reported. A trivial fix (adding install-shellcheck as a prerequisite) would resolve it, but a maintainer needs to confirm the intended approach first.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":13.5,"staleness":80,"complexity":10,"confidence":75,"support_request":10},"age_days":482,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-05-19T04:40:44+00:00","updated_at":"2025-05-19T04:40:44+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":80,"complexity":10,"support_request":10,"confidence":75,"impact":15,"quick_win":13.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":39801,"project_name":"craft-providers","source":"github","external_id":"711","title":"Rebase craft-providers on starbase","author":"mattculler","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-providers/issues/711","summary":"craft-providers rebased on starbase through multiple commits (e.g., 068e402, 8fd197d). Issue remains open despite completion.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The rebasing work has been completed through multiple commits (e.g., 068e402 'Merge remote-tracking branch starbase/main into work/rebase-starbase/CRAFT-3867', 8fd197d 'chore: merge the latest starbase'). The issue is no longer relevant as the task has been accomplished.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":28.0,"staleness":80,"complexity":30,"confidence":70,"support_request":0},"age_days":613,"labels":["Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2025-01-07T19:18:45+00:00","updated_at":"2026-04-22T02:48:36+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":80,"complexity":30,"support_request":0,"confidence":70,"impact":40,"quick_win":28.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":15287,"project_name":"craft-store","source":"github","external_id":"167","title":"Update to latest starbase","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-store/issues/167","summary":"Maintenance task to merge the latest starbase changes into craft-store for consistency. 880 days old, last activity a Jira bot comment; starbase updates have since been merged repeatedly (latest PR #409, 2026-07-22).","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 880 days old with no maintainer engagement beyond the 2024-04-03 Jira bot comment (CRAFT-2664), and the specific catch-up it requests has been superseded: the repo has merged starbase updates repeatedly since, including PRs #337, #377, #387 (2026-06-18) and #409 (2026-07-22). The project has an established recurring process for these merges, so this one-off tracker is no longer applicable.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":12.0,"staleness":80,"complexity":20,"confidence":75,"support_request":0},"age_days":892,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-04-03T20:11:25+00:00","updated_at":"2025-05-01T16:43:50+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":80,"complexity":20,"support_request":0,"confidence":75,"impact":15,"quick_win":12.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":16296,"project_name":"starflow","source":"github","external_id":"86","title":"feat: Workflow for testing setup","author":"lengau","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/starflow/pull/86","summary":"Adds a GitHub Actions workflow for testing setup (+70 lines, 2 files). Pending review, 0 reviewers, no body or comments. CI shows 8 failing linux test jobs across distros; other checks pass. Inactive ~12 months.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer-authored feature adding a test workflow, pending with 0 reviewers and no comments for 361 days. CI shows 8 failing 'test / linux' jobs (debian, fedora, opensuse, ubuntu variants) that need fixing before merge, so it warrants review rather than closure. No clear evidence the feature is superseded or irrelevant, which is required for close_stale.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":80,"complexity":40,"confidence":55},"age_days":373,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-09-05T02:52:31+00:00","updated_at":"2025-09-05T03:11:16+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":80,"complexity":40,"support_request":null,"confidence":55,"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":29882,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1995424","title":"A way to get debug symbols","author":"~ilya-fedin","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1995424","summary":"Feature request for snap debug symbols infrastructure to help with crash debugging. No maintainer response in 1401 days.","suggested_action":"close_not_a_bug","suggested_action_reason":"This is a feature request for snap infrastructure to support debug symbols, not a bug in snapcraft. The issue has had no maintainer response in 1401 days and is about snapd/snap store functionality rather than snapcraft itself.","scores":{"impact":70,"quick_win":28.0,"staleness":80,"complexity":60,"confidence":70,"support_request":80},"age_days":1411,"labels":[],"created_at":"2022-11-02T02:19:21.387808+00:00","updated_at":"2023-08-17T18:16:58.249875+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":80,"complexity":60,"support_request":80,"confidence":70,"impact":70,"quick_win":28.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":5025,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"650","title":"ROCK and chisselled ROCK tutorials have distracting diff","author":"cpaelzer","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/650","summary":"Docs nit: hello and chiselled-hello tutorial rockcraft.yaml files had distracting diffs beyond the real change. The chiselled-hello tutorial was removed in #1222 and chisel content moved to how-to guides, making the issue moot.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The chiselled-hello tutorial referenced in this issue was removed in PR #1222 (commit cd5c9ca3 'docs: Remove Shrink a rock with Chisel tutorial'), and chisel documentation was restructured into how-to guides (e.g. docs/how-to/chiseling/chisel-existing-rock.rst). The current tutorial index no longer lists a chisel tutorial, so the side-by-side diff problem no longer exists. The issue is no longer applicable to the current documentation structure.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":13.5,"staleness":80,"complexity":10,"confidence":85,"support_request":0},"age_days":780,"labels":["Type: Documentation"],"created_at":"2024-07-24T10:04:21+00:00","updated_at":"2025-12-11T14:52:14+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":80,"complexity":10,"support_request":0,"confidence":85,"impact":15,"quick_win":13.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":13508,"project_name":"craft-cli","source":"github","external_id":"232","title":"Capture warnings and present them to developers.","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-cli/issues/232","summary":"Feature request to use logging.captureWarnings to surface Python warnings to developers while hiding them from users by default. Open, unlabelled, zero comments, no maintainer activity for ~2.5 years; feature not yet implemented in codebase.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is unlabelled with zero comments and no maintainer response in ~2.5 years, showing no sign of triage. The feature is not implemented (no captureWarnings anywhere in the codebase) and the logging infrastructure it would extend (the _Handler in craft_cli/messages.py) still exists, so it remains applicable but needs a maintainer to categorise and prioritise it.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":19.25,"staleness":80,"complexity":45,"confidence":78,"support_request":10},"age_days":948,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-02-07T22:02:40+00:00","updated_at":"2024-02-07T22:02:40+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":80,"complexity":45,"support_request":10,"confidence":78,"impact":35,"quick_win":19.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":1952,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2180","title":"Workflow for documentation contributors needs to be improved","author":"evildmp","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/2180","summary":"Request to standardize Sphinx docs build workflow to 'cd docs && make install && make run'. The current docs/Makefile already has both 'install' and 'run' targets matching this exact workflow, introduced by the canonical starter pack 1.5 update in PR #2594. Issue is unlabelled with zero comments and no activity in over a year.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The requested workflow is already implemented: docs/Makefile defines 'install: $(DOCS_VENVDIR)' and 'run: install' (sphinx-autobuild), matching the issue's exact ask. These targets were introduced by commit 6264ff78 'build(docs)!: update canonical starter pack to 1.5 (#2594)', which postdates this issue (#2180). The issue has had zero comments, no labels, and no activity for 381+ days, and the underlying problem is no longer applicable.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":24.0,"staleness":80,"complexity":20,"confidence":72,"support_request":10},"age_days":570,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-02-19T21:15:37+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:17:35+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":80,"complexity":20,"support_request":10,"confidence":72,"impact":30,"quick_win":24.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":12850,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"222","title":"Specify a project's lifecycle","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/issues/222","summary":"Design task to define and document Project lifecycle in craft-application: creation, mutation (adopt-info), and command/service interaction. Unlabelled, no maintainer response, inactive 465 days.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no assignee, and the only comment is the Jira-sync bot (2024-02-21) — no maintainer has assessed, categorised, or responded to it in 465 days. It is a maintainer-authored architectural design task (project creation, mutation via LifecycleService/adopt-info, access rules) that requires a maintainer to decide whether the questions remain open or have been addressed by subsequent PRs.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":11.25,"staleness":80,"complexity":75,"confidence":60,"support_request":5},"age_days":934,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-02-21T16:59:57+00:00","updated_at":"2025-05-23T17:27:04+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":80,"complexity":75,"support_request":5,"confidence":60,"impact":45,"quick_win":11.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":15606,"project_name":"snapcraft-rocks","source":"github","external_id":"104","title":"chore(deps): update dependency canonical/snapcraft to v8.14.5 (core22-8)","author":"renovate","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft-rocks/pull/104","summary":"Renovate bot PR updating canonical/snapcraft from 8.11.1 to 8.14.5 for core22-8 branch. 355 days old, 0 comments, CI failing on build-rock jobs.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"PR is 355 days old with zero maintainer comments or engagement. Related issues (e.g., snapcraft-rocks#100) show newer dependency updates have already been merged, indicating this PR has been superseded. The failing CI checks are on self-hosted build-rock jobs, likely infrastructure-related rather than code issues.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":19.0,"staleness":80,"complexity":5,"confidence":70},"age_days":360,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-09-17T16:15:18+00:00","updated_at":"2026-09-07T16:13:39+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":80,"complexity":5,"support_request":null,"confidence":70,"impact":20,"quick_win":19.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":21852,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1233","title":"cargo-use plugin: Support `disable-parallel` parameter","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/1233","summary":"Feature request to add disable-parallel to the cargo-use plugin. Labeled Needs information; maintainer awaits a real-world use case, none provided in ~12 months. Plugin still lacks the property; its build step is a file copy, so the property would be a no-op.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is labeled 'Status: Needs information' and the body explicitly says it is 'extremely low priority until someone shows us a real-world use case'; no use case has been provided in 363 days, far past the 6-month threshold for a maintainer-requested detail. Additionally, the cargo-use plugin's build step is only a `cp` command (no actual build runs), so disable-parallel would be a no-op, giving a concrete reason the request is not actionable as filed.","scores":{"impact":10,"quick_win":8.5,"staleness":80,"complexity":15,"confidence":75,"support_request":10},"age_days":375,"labels":["Status: Needs information"],"created_at":"2025-09-02T15:23:07+00:00","updated_at":"2025-09-02T15:23:07+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":80,"complexity":15,"support_request":10,"confidence":75,"impact":10,"quick_win":8.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":16334,"project_name":"starflow","source":"github","external_id":"48","title":"Add publisher worflows","author":"upils","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/starflow/issues/48","summary":"Feature request to add a reusable release-publish workflow to starflow, adapted from the craft libs' release-publish.yaml. Open ~542 days with one maintainer comment questioning release-drafter's value; no labels, not yet implemented.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Filed by maintainer upils and engaged by another maintainer (tigarmo, 2025-03-07) on the release-workflow topic, so it has maintainer acknowledgement and is a valid, scoped request; no release-publish workflow exists in .github/workflows yet. It has been dormant ~490 days, but the repo is active and the feature is still missing, so it remains relevant and should stay open rather than be closed as stale.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":19.25,"staleness":80,"complexity":45,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":554,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-03-07T15:40:13+00:00","updated_at":"2025-04-28T12:55:04+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":80,"complexity":45,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":35,"quick_win":19.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":4372,"project_name":"imagecraft","source":"github","external_id":"95","title":"Incorporate `mount` and `umount` from `imgmount.py` into `imagecraft` itself","author":"mattculler","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/imagecraft/issues/95","summary":"Feature suggestion to add imagecraft.mount and imagecraft.umount entrypoints, incorporating mount/umount functionality from imgmount.py into the imagecraft package. Open ~18 months with no labels, comments, or maintainer response.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no assignee, and zero comments in 556 days, so it was never triaged or categorised. It is a feature suggestion (not a bug) raised from a review discussion on PR #94, and with no evidence it was implemented elsewhere or is obsolete, a maintainer should assess it rather than auto-close it as stale.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":80,"complexity":40,"confidence":65,"support_request":35},"age_days":568,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-02-21T21:16:50+00:00","updated_at":"2025-02-21T21:17:01+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":80,"complexity":40,"support_request":35,"confidence":65,"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":15175,"project_name":"craft-store","source":"github","external_id":"279","title":"Add a login client","author":"mr-cal","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-store/issues/279","summary":"Feature request for a login client that takes a host, macaroon, and app name to save credentials via set_credentials. Filed by maintainer 532 days ago, synced to Jira (CRAFT-4351), no further activity. UbuntuOneLogin (PR #369) later added a different SSO-based login flow.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 532 days old with no maintainer interaction beyond the Jira sync bot comment. The project has since added UbuntuOneLogin (PR #369, commit d4e9806) which provides a full Ubuntu One SSO login client, indicating the legacy macaroon-based login use case described here is likely no longer applicable. No labels, no triage, and the self-filing maintainer has not picked it up in 1.5 years.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":26.25,"staleness":80,"complexity":25,"confidence":65,"support_request":10},"age_days":544,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-03-17T17:31:44+00:00","updated_at":"2025-05-01T16:43:47+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":80,"complexity":25,"support_request":10,"confidence":65,"impact":35,"quick_win":26.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":21836,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1249","title":"qmake plugin: Support `disable-parallel` parameter","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/1249","summary":"Feature request to add the disable-parallel part property to the qmake plugin, which still hardcodes make -j. Labeled Needs information; explicitly low priority until a real-world use case is provided; no activity for 363 days.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is labeled 'Status: Needs information' and its body explicitly asks for a real-world use case, calling it 'extremely low priority' without one; no use case or any other activity has appeared in 363 days, far beyond the 6-month window. The qmake plugin still hardcodes 'make -j{parallel_build_count}', so the gap is real but unvalidated; closing as stale is appropriate and it can be reopened if a concrete use case emerges.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":12.75,"staleness":80,"complexity":15,"confidence":80,"support_request":0},"age_days":375,"labels":["Type: Enhancement","Status: Needs information"],"created_at":"2025-09-02T15:27:14+00:00","updated_at":"2025-09-02T15:27:14+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":80,"complexity":15,"support_request":0,"confidence":80,"impact":15,"quick_win":12.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":46472,"project_name":"fetch-service","source":"github","external_id":"156","title":"Add inspector for images","author":"jugmac00","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/fetch-service/issues/156","summary":"Feature request to add an image inspector to the fetch service. Open 783 days with no labels, no comments, and no maintainer engagement.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no maintainer response, and zero comments, indicating it has never been triaged. While it is 783 days old, without evidence that the feature is no longer relevant or has been implemented elsewhere, a maintainer should assess its current applicability before deciding to close it.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"staleness":80,"complexity":40,"confidence":60,"support_request":20},"age_days":786,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-07-19T05:56:27+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:15:49+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":80,"complexity":40,"support_request":20,"confidence":60,"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":12812,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"261","title":"Commands cannot always load projects with advanced grammar","author":"mr-cal","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/issues/261","summary":"Commands fail to load projects using advanced grammar when no build-for or platform is provided. Open since 2024-03, no maintainer response beyond a Jira sync bot; fix approach (loading only some project items) still unimplemented.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is a real bug reported by a maintainer with a concrete failing CI example (snapcraft core24 grammar spread test) and a proposed direction (load only some project items), but it has no labels, no assignee, and no maintainer acknowledgement beyond the Jira sync bot (CRAFT-2596). Current ProjectService.configure() still requires platform/build-for resolution before grammar processing, so the problem appears unresolved. It should stay open pending triage/implementation.","scores":{"impact":55,"quick_win":19.25,"staleness":78,"complexity":65,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":915,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-03-11T15:31:37+00:00","updated_at":"2025-05-23T17:27:01+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":78,"complexity":65,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":55,"quick_win":19.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":5369,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"306","title":"Reflexion about documentation dependencies","author":"SamirPS","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/306","summary":"Docs dependency cleanup task from 2023 asking to rethink sphinx-autodoc and align requirements with sphinx-starter-pack. The docs infrastructure has since been reworked around the Sphinx Stack subproject, making the original premise largely obsolete. No maintainer comments.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The docs build was fundamentally reworked: the starter pack became the Sphinx Stack subproject (commits #1112, #1252), docs/requirements.txt was refactored, and the dependency management process now follows the Sphinx Stack model described in docs/README.md. The original question about aligning with sphinx-starter-pack is moot given this architectural change, and the issue has had zero maintainer engagement in 3+ years.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":12.0,"staleness":78,"complexity":20,"confidence":72,"support_request":10},"age_days":1173,"labels":["Type: Documentation"],"created_at":"2023-06-27T16:17:56+00:00","updated_at":"2025-12-11T15:25:47+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":78,"complexity":20,"support_request":10,"confidence":72,"impact":15,"quick_win":12.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":21511,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1578","title":"chore: merge the latest starbase","author":"lengau","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/pull/1578","summary":"Routine chore to merge latest starbase CI/CD config (26 files, +422/-425). 112 days old, no review or comments, 10 CI tests failing (mostly s390x). CI files in main have since been updated independently, making this PR's changes outdated.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"This is a routine 'merge the latest starbase' chore that is 112 days old with zero activity. Since its creation, main has received multiple independent CI updates (e.g. #1696, #1677, #1672, #1670, #1668, #1655, #1640) touching the same .github/workflows files, so the PR's starbase snapshot is no longer 'the latest' and would conflict with current main. A fresh starbase sync PR would supersede it.","scores":{"impact":10,"quick_win":8.5,"staleness":78,"complexity":15,"confidence":72},"age_days":124,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-05-11T13:36:12+00:00","updated_at":"2026-05-11T14:31:44+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":78,"complexity":15,"support_request":null,"confidence":72,"impact":10,"quick_win":8.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":5050,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"625","title":"Surface `rockcraft pack` errors to accelerate development","author":"hd9","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/625","summary":"Feature request to surface the functional error from override-build scripts in rockcraft pack output by default. Maintainer acknowledged and agreed with the goal but noted the difficulty of handling arbitrary bash scripts; requested suggestions for a general approach. No follow-up from reporter for over 2 years.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer tigarmo (2024-07-05) acknowledged the request and explicitly asked for 'suggestions on how to handle this in the general case' given that override-build scripts are arbitrary bash with no fixed error format. The reporter never provided a follow-up proposal, and the issue has had zero activity for over 2 years (787 days). The 'Failed to execute rockcraft in instance' message originates from craft-application upstream (no matches in the rockcraft repo), further complicating a local fix. Per the stale-closure guideline, a maintainer request for input left unanswered for well over 6 months is sufficient grounds to close.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":78,"complexity":55,"confidence":72,"support_request":25},"age_days":800,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-07-04T22:52:42+00:00","updated_at":"2024-07-05T11:29:50+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":78,"complexity":55,"support_request":25,"confidence":72,"impact":40,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":6108,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"5782","title":"Error when validating the model if a `snapcraftctl` command is used","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/5782","summary":"Request to add a model validation error when override scripts use snapcraftctl, linking to migration docs. Parent issue #5754 (removing the wrapper) was closed/abandoned; core26-specific error was already implemented in PR #5983. Issue is 347 days old with no further activity.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The parent issue #5754 (removing the snapcraftctl wrapper) was closed as abandoned to avoid breaking core22/core24 builds, and the core26-specific validation error was already implemented in PR #5983 ('feat!: error on snapcraftctl for core26'). The broader scope of erroring on all bases was explicitly dropped, making the remaining ask moot. 347 days of inactivity with only a Jira bot comment confirms no active work.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":24.5,"staleness":78,"complexity":30,"confidence":72,"support_request":5},"age_days":359,"labels":["Status: Triaged"],"created_at":"2025-09-18T20:15:07+00:00","updated_at":"2025-09-18T20:15:25+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":78,"complexity":30,"support_request":5,"confidence":72,"impact":35,"quick_win":24.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":21776,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1309","title":"test: run tests in a random order","author":"lengau","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/pull/1309","summary":"Adds pytest-randomly to run the test suite in a random order, catching hidden interdependencies between tests. Open ~11.5 months with no review or comments; 11 CI jobs fail because randomization exposes test coupling. Not yet merged.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"The PR is by maintainer lengau but has sat 347 days with 0 comments, 0 reviewers, and an unchecked 'make lint && make test' box. 11 CI jobs (mostly test-common slow/fast) fail because randomizing order surfaces real test interdependencies that were never fixed, so it is not mergeable as-is. The goal is still valid and not implemented elsewhere (no pytest-randomly in pyproject.toml), so a maintainer must decide whether to pick it up and resolve the coupling or close it.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":21.0,"staleness":78,"complexity":40,"confidence":78},"age_days":361,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-09-16T20:11:11+00:00","updated_at":"2025-09-18T18:57:05+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":78,"complexity":40,"support_request":null,"confidence":78,"impact":35,"quick_win":21.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":4703,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"972","title":"fix: bump name length minimum back up to 2","author":"lengau","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/pull/972","summary":"Bumps rockcraft project name min_length back to 2 as a workaround for the craft-application#894 impasse; open 347 days, 0 comments, no reviewers, CI failing on snap-tests and build.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The PR is a maintainer's explicit workaround for the stalled canonical/craft-application#894 (still open, 'stalled for over a year due to cross-project compatibility concerns'), so it remains relevant and not superseded. It has no maintainer interaction or review yet (0 comments, pending review), and CI is failing on snap-tests/build, so it needs a maintainer to triage and address the failing checks rather than being closed as stale.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":22.5,"staleness":78,"complexity":25,"confidence":55},"age_days":360,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-09-18T02:29:09+00:00","updated_at":"2025-09-22T15:56:11+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":78,"complexity":25,"support_request":null,"confidence":55,"impact":30,"quick_win":22.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":7181,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"4697","title":"The partial organize operations of parts are missing","author":"LaiderLai","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/4697","summary":"Core20 cross-arch build: organize with ${SNAPCRAFT_ARCH_TRIPLET} misses files without --target-arch flag. Maintainer asked in Jan 2026 if still reproducible in Snapcraft 8; no response. Core20 has since been dropped.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer @mr-cal asked on 2026-01-27 whether the issue persists in Snapcraft 8 and received no response for ~7 months. Additionally, the affected base (core20) has been dropped from the project (commit fa7952b4d, #6019), and Snapcraft 8.0.0 introduced SNAPCRAFT_ARCH_TRIPLET_BUILD_FOR to supersede the ambiguous SNAPCRAFT_ARCH_TRIPLET variable, making the original reproduction path no longer applicable.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":19.25,"staleness":78,"complexity":45,"confidence":72,"support_request":10},"age_days":901,"labels":["Status: Needs information"],"created_at":"2024-03-26T09:48:03+00:00","updated_at":"2026-01-27T22:52:02+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":78,"complexity":45,"support_request":10,"confidence":72,"impact":35,"quick_win":19.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":1589,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2553","title":"Redo in-page links for: Manage channels, Manage Charmcraft, and Manage charms in How to guides","author":"activus-d","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/pull/2553","summary":"Docs-only PR moving single-link block references into main text for three How-to guides (Manage channels, Manage Charmcraft, Manage charms). Approved by 1 reviewer, 14 unresolved comments, inactive ~7 months; same in-page-link redo merged via #2575.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"Last activity was 206 days ago (author pinged @lengau for review on 2026-02-06) with 14 unresolved review comments never addressed, and the same in-page-link redo for the 'manage' how-to guides was already merged as #2575, with the target files since heavily reworked (e.g. #2810, #2748, #2712). The current manage-channels.rst already uses the inline :ref: style this PR introduces, so the change is largely superseded.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":12.75,"staleness":78,"complexity":15,"confidence":68},"age_days":228,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-01-27T11:05:49+00:00","updated_at":"2026-02-06T19:21:03+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":78,"complexity":15,"support_request":null,"confidence":68,"impact":15,"quick_win":12.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":21534,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1555","title":"Add workflow and integration test reproducing libapt ABI mismatch (Issue #1554)","author":"Copilot","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/pull/1555","summary":"Adds a GitHub workflow and integration test to reproduce the libapt ABI mismatch from issue #1554 using LXC containers. Review status is changes_requested with 2 unresolved comments; author unresponsive for 131 days. CI failing on multiple checks including Conventional Commits policy.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer @lengau requested a specific change (sleep 10s after container launch) 131 days ago and the author has not responded. The PR also fails the Conventional Commits policy check, and the related issue #1554's root-cause theory is being actively challenged by maintainers, making this LXC-based reproducer approach potentially misaligned with the investigation direction.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":15.0,"staleness":78,"complexity":40,"confidence":62},"age_days":144,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-04-22T05:12:40+00:00","updated_at":"2026-04-22T14:32:48+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":true,"staleness":78,"complexity":40,"support_request":null,"confidence":62,"impact":25,"quick_win":15.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":15651,"project_name":"snapcraft-rocks","source":"github","external_id":"59","title":"Add `SNAPCRAFT_BUILD_ENVIRONMENT=host` to Docker image","author":"abitrolly","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft-rocks/issues/59","summary":"Feature request to set SNAPCRAFT_BUILD_ENVIRONMENT=host in the snapcraft-rocks Docker image so snapcraft can be run manually inside for troubleshooting. Unlabelled, no comments, no maintainer activity for ~23 months.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"This is a feature request (add SNAPCRAFT_BUILD_ENVIRONMENT=host to the image for troubleshooting) with 0 comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction in 706 days, so it has not been triaged. The referenced issue #57 is still open, and the env var is not set in the image sources I can see, so it is not clearly resolved. It is a small, low-impact change but unaddressed and unlabelled, so needs_triage is the appropriate default.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":21.25,"staleness":78,"complexity":15,"confidence":62,"support_request":25},"age_days":718,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-09-24T16:10:13+00:00","updated_at":"2024-09-24T16:10:13+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":78,"complexity":15,"support_request":25,"confidence":62,"impact":25,"quick_win":21.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":7693,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"4182","title":"Add electron-builder test for core20","author":"sergiusens","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/4182","summary":"Request to add an electron-builder spread test using core20 base (via package.json syntax) to preserve feature parity after core18 removal. Triaged by maintainer sergiusens; no implementation found in current codebase.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is labeled 'Status: Triaged' and 'Type: Enhancement' by maintainer sergiusens, indicating it has been assessed and accepted as valid work. The Jira sync bot created internal tickets (SNAPCRAFT-1078/1079) on 2025-04-24, confirming it is tracked. No evidence in the current codebase shows the core20 electron-builder test was added, so it remains unaddressed. However, the last activity was 494 days ago and core20 support has since been dropped from the project (commits 'chore!: drop core20 (#6019)' and 'test: remove core20 spread tests (#6009)'), which may make the specific core20 test request obsolete — a maintainer should confirm whether this is still relevant or should be closed as outdated.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":26.25,"staleness":78,"complexity":25,"confidence":62,"support_request":0},"age_days":1205,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2023-05-26T18:44:24+00:00","updated_at":"2025-04-24T14:04:36+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":78,"complexity":25,"support_request":0,"confidence":62,"impact":35,"quick_win":26.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":4930,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"745","title":"Adds run_once_command rock build option","author":"claudiubelu","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/pull/745","summary":"Adds a run_once_command rockcraft build option to bypass the Pebble entrypoint for short-lived workloads (K8s Jobs, init containers, *ctl images). Pending, no CI, last activity 2024-11-05; maintainers deferred design to Pebble, and the need was later met by the entrypoint-command key.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"Inactive since 2024-11-05 (~13 months), with the maintainer stating the design would be handled in Pebble first (pebble#240, pebble#495) and that rockcraft support would need its own design. That design has since shipped as the entrypoint-command key (PR #939, Rockcraft 1.14 release notes: 'New entrypoint-command project key ... bypassing the default Pebble-powered entrypoint'), and no run_once code exists in the current tree, so this PR's approach is superseded.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":15.0,"staleness":78,"complexity":40,"confidence":80},"age_days":678,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-11-04T08:18:19+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:12:43+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":78,"complexity":40,"support_request":null,"confidence":80,"impact":25,"quick_win":15.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":15807,"project_name":"starbase","source":"github","external_id":"438","title":"Use starflow's dev environment workflow","author":"mr-cal","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/starbase/issues/438","summary":"Enhancement to add a GitHub workflow using starflow's dev environment workflow (canonical/starflow#85). Triaged by a maintainer with a Jira ticket (CRAFT-4740) but no activity for ~12 months; the workflow is not yet present in .github/workflows.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is already triaged (labels 'Status: Triaged' and 'Type: Enhancement', author is maintainer mr-cal, and a Jira ticket CRAFT-4740 was created), so it is not needs_triage. The requested dev-environment workflow is still absent from .github/workflows (only check-renovate, policy, qa, release-publish, tics exist) and there is no evidence the starflow#85 approach is obsolete, so it is not clearly outdated enough to close as stale. It is a valid, scoped DX enhancement that should remain open despite ~12 months of inactivity.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":19.25,"staleness":78,"complexity":45,"confidence":74,"support_request":0},"age_days":373,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2025-09-04T14:53:07+00:00","updated_at":"2025-09-04T14:59:46+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":78,"complexity":45,"support_request":0,"confidence":74,"impact":35,"quick_win":19.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":5247,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"428","title":"add the typical environment variables to any interactive session, like with `--debug`","author":"ca-scribner","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/428","summary":"Feature request to include build-stage env vars (CRAFT_PART_BUILD, CRAFT_PRIME, etc.) in the interactive shell dropped on `--debug` build failure. No labels, no maintainer comments, no assignee; untriaged for ~2.7 years.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has zero labels, zero comments, and no assignee, with last activity 381 days ago and no maintainer acknowledgement, so it has never been triaged. It is a valid, well-scoped feature request (env vars like CRAFT_PART_BUILD are already defined in craft-parts' executor/environment.py), but the fix likely belongs in craft-parts rather than rockcraft, which needs maintainer assessment to route correctly.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":19.25,"staleness":78,"complexity":45,"confidence":62,"support_request":10},"age_days":1017,"labels":[],"created_at":"2023-11-30T18:19:24+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:12:53+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":78,"complexity":45,"support_request":10,"confidence":62,"impact":35,"quick_win":19.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":12036,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"1038","title":"ci(spread): switch from manually running spread to using snapcraft test","author":"lengau","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/pull/1038","summary":"CI config change to run spread tests via `snapcraft test` instead of manually. 165 days old, 0 reviews, CI failing on all craft-test jobs. Target file spread.yaml since deprecated in favor of <app-name>-test.yaml (#1168).","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"PR is 165 days old with zero comments or reviews, and CI fails on all four craft-test jobs plus snap-tests. More critically, the project has since deprecated spread.yaml entirely in favor of <app-name>-test.yaml (PR #1168), making this PR's approach of modifying spread.yaml obsolete. The underlying goal (issue #806) remains open and can be addressed with a fresh PR targeting the new test.yaml format.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":19.25,"staleness":78,"complexity":45,"confidence":78},"age_days":177,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-03-19T16:49:10+00:00","updated_at":"2026-03-19T18:24:15+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":78,"complexity":45,"support_request":null,"confidence":78,"impact":35,"quick_win":19.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":2419,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"1710","title":"Add Noble support to charmcraft 2.x","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/1710","summary":"Feature request (by maintainer lengau) to add Noble (Ubuntu 24.04) support to charmcraft 2.x, marking bases+noble as deprecated ahead of removal in 3.x. No comments; project has since moved to 4.x with full Noble support and the platforms notation.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue targets charmcraft 2.x specifically, but the repo is now on 4.x (release notes for 4.4 exist) with Noble fully supported (noble spread tests, CI on noble, dev-noble group) and the 3.x+ platforms notation implemented via craft_platforms. The 2.x-specific ask is no longer applicable since that major is superseded, and the issue has had no comments in ~2 years (last activity 381 days ago).","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":16.25,"staleness":78,"complexity":35,"confidence":72,"support_request":5},"age_days":810,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-06-24T14:55:19+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:18:00+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":78,"complexity":35,"support_request":5,"confidence":72,"impact":25,"quick_win":16.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":7336,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"4541","title":"Identical `parts` in different snaps contain different contents","author":"dilyn-corner","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/4541","summary":"Bug report: identical `parts` (e.g. a `netplan` nil-plugin part with the same stage-packages) in two different snaps produce different `parts/<part>/` contents (build/install/src/stage_packages). Reported on snapcraft 10445 with base core24 in a 23.10 VM; author later noted they could not reproduce with base core22 in a Jammy VM. Open, no labels, no maintainer response.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"No labels, no assignee, and no maintainer acknowledgement — the only comment is the reporter's own note (2024-02-06) that they could not reproduce with base core22 in a Jammy VM. The reproduction is heavy (LXD VM, destructive-mode, a specific external repo/branch) and the reporter's own follow-up weakens the case, so a maintainer needs to assess whether this is a real core24-era bug or an environment artifact before any close/keep decision.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":13.5,"staleness":78,"complexity":70,"confidence":55,"support_request":10},"age_days":962,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-01-24T21:13:39+00:00","updated_at":"2025-03-13T18:36:56+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":78,"complexity":70,"support_request":10,"confidence":55,"impact":45,"quick_win":13.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":12279,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"795","title":"fix(init): exit parent template dir context after using it","author":"jonathan-conder","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/pull/795","summary":"Fix init command to keep parent template dir context active during use; changes requested by 2 reviewers with 8 unresolved comments, no author response in ~10 months, CI failing on test jobs.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"Review status is changes_requested from 2 reviewers with 8 unresolved comments and last activity was 301 days ago, well past the 3-month threshold for unaddressed maintainer feedback. The underlying bug (importlib.resources.path context manager exiting before the path is used in craft_application/commands/init.py) still exists in the codebase, but the PR has been abandoned by its author.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":29.25,"staleness":78,"complexity":35,"confidence":72},"age_days":440,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-06-30T06:39:00+00:00","updated_at":"2025-11-03T10:21:17+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":78,"complexity":35,"support_request":null,"confidence":72,"impact":45,"quick_win":29.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":4826,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"849","title":"docs: add new guide on when to use overlay and stage packages","author":"alesancor1","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/pull/849","summary":"Adds a new how-to guide comparing overlay-packages vs stage-packages (5 files, +215 lines). Changes requested with 37 unresolved review comments; author unresponsive for ~9 months. Target path docs/how-to/rocks/ no longer exists after docs reorganization.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The reviewer requested changes (37 unresolved comments) and the author has not responded in 263 days, far exceeding the 3-month threshold. Additionally, the target path docs/how-to/rocks/ has been reorganized (now docs/how-to/web-app-rocks/ and other structures), so the PR would need to be substantially reworked. The underlying need (issue #334) remains open, so a new PR targeting the current docs structure could be opened if desired.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":25.5,"staleness":78,"complexity":15,"confidence":72},"age_days":534,"labels":["Type: Documentation"],"created_at":"2025-03-27T16:23:49+00:00","updated_at":"2025-12-11T15:02:13+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":78,"complexity":15,"support_request":null,"confidence":72,"impact":30,"quick_win":25.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":4760,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"915","title":"[Bug] `make setup` missing deps - snapd, curl, gcc, libgit2-dev, sudo","author":"AlexBaranowski","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/915","summary":"make setup on a bare Ubuntu container fails due to missing system deps (curl, gcc, libgit2-dev, sudo, snapd for integration tests). No maintainer response or labels in 421 days; Makefile now auto-installs some build deps but not all reported ones.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction in 421 days, so it has never been triaged. The report is a legitimate, reproducible bug: the current Makefile's install-build-deps only detects libxml2-dev, libxslt1-dev, python3-venv, libyaml-dev, fuse-overlayfs, umoci, and skopeo, but not curl, gcc, libgit2-dev, or sudo, so the reported failures likely persist. The libgit2-dev commit (66d62aff) appears to be from an older Makefile state and is not reflected in the current APT_PACKAGES list.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":26.0,"staleness":78,"complexity":35,"confidence":60,"support_request":25},"age_days":434,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-07-06T01:43:49+00:00","updated_at":"2025-07-06T01:44:04+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":78,"complexity":35,"support_request":25,"confidence":60,"impact":40,"quick_win":26.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":7299,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"4578","title":"SSH key password prompt doesn't appear when cloning repositories","author":"dilyn-corner","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/4578","summary":"SSH key passphrase prompt is overwritten by the 'Pulling' progress spinner during Git clone with brief verbosity. Untriaged, no maintainer response, inactive for ~18 months. Only a bot Jira-sync comment exists.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no assignee, and no maintainer response — only an automated Jira-sync bot comment (CRAFT-2496). It is a well-structured bug report with clear reproduction steps identifying the craft-cli printer/spinner as the likely culprit, but no maintainer has assessed, labelled, or prioritised it. The underlying spinner system in craft-cli still exists, so the bug may still be reproducible, but it needs a maintainer to confirm and scope a fix.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":78,"complexity":55,"confidence":72,"support_request":5},"age_days":942,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-02-14T03:38:58+00:00","updated_at":"2025-03-13T18:36:53+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":78,"complexity":55,"support_request":5,"confidence":72,"impact":40,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":12118,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"954","title":"Add agents.md documentation for AI coding assistants","author":"Copilot","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/pull/954","summary":"Adds agents.md with AI coding assistant docs for dev workflow. Stuck in changes_requested with 59 unresolved comments for ~9 months; project since adopted .github/instructions/ and Copilot Collections.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"Review status is changes_requested with 59 unresolved comments and no activity for 269 days. The project has since adopted a different agent-documentation approach via .github/instructions/ (9 files) and Copilot Collections config (#1139, #1148, #1161), and prettier was updated to ignore agent Markdown instructions (#1157), indicating the original agents.md approach was superseded.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":12.75,"staleness":78,"complexity":15,"confidence":72},"age_days":311,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-11-05T15:12:52+00:00","updated_at":"2025-12-06T03:25:57+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":true,"staleness":78,"complexity":15,"support_request":null,"confidence":72,"impact":15,"quick_win":12.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":12258,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"816","title":"Config service should check whether the program is running in the app's snap","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/issues/816","summary":"SnapConfigHandler uses snaphelpers.is_snap() instead of checking the app's specific snap name; the is_running_from_snap() utility exists but is unused here. Unaddressed for 410 days with no labels or maintainer response.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The bug is confirmed in current code (line 106 still uses snaphelpers.is_snap()), and the is_running_from_snap() utility in util/snap_config.py already provides the correct app-specific check, but the issue has no labels, no maintainer comments, and no assignee after 410 days.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":28.0,"staleness":78,"complexity":20,"confidence":82,"support_request":0},"age_days":422,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-07-17T22:12:06+00:00","updated_at":"2025-07-17T22:12:06+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":78,"complexity":20,"support_request":0,"confidence":82,"impact":35,"quick_win":28.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":6660,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"5219","title":"Snapcraft unable to compile ARM64 kernel","author":"RuhanSA079","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/5219","summary":"Cross-compiling an ARM64 kernel with snapcraft 7.5.8/8.5.1 fails when the kernel plugin runs 'apt-get download snapd:arm64' for snap bootstrap, because the Focal build environment has no snapd arm64 candidate. No maintainer response; reporter reproduced the apt error on Ubuntu 20/22 in Jan 2025.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"No labels, no assignee, and no maintainer comments — only the reporter's own follow-up (2025-01-29) reproducing 'E: Can't select candidate version from package snapd:<arch>' via apt-get download on Ubuntu 20/22. The failure is in the kernel plugin's snap-bootstrap step (apt-get download snapd:arm64), which is a real bug in the plugin's package sourcing, but it has never been triaged. The current main branch's kernel/initrd plugins were substantially reworked (e.g. #6254, #6306), so a maintainer needs to determine whether the snapd-deb download path still exists or was replaced before deciding to close or fix.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":78,"complexity":55,"confidence":55,"support_request":25},"age_days":592,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-01-28T16:05:51+00:00","updated_at":"2025-01-29T09:13:19+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":78,"complexity":55,"support_request":25,"confidence":55,"impact":40,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":22196,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"889","title":"add \"always run\" plugin hook","author":"flotter","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/889","summary":"Feature request for an optional 'always run' plugin hook so plugins can execute actions regardless of source changes (e.g. build-time GUID generation, craft YAML config propagation). Unlabelled, zero comments, no maintainer response in ~671 days; feature not implemented in current code.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no assignee, and zero comments in 671 days, so it has never been assessed by a maintainer. It is not a candidate for close_stale because the requested capability is still absent from the codebase (no always-run hook in craft_parts/plugins/base.py, and the sequencer's dirty/outdated logic in sequencer.py still skips clean steps), so the request remains applicable rather than outdated. A maintainer needs to decide whether to scope this architectural change or decline it.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":15.0,"staleness":78,"complexity":70,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":683,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-10-29T15:59:06+00:00","updated_at":"2025-03-11T14:28:49+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":78,"complexity":70,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":50,"quick_win":15.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":22262,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"823","title":"Please support gradle plugin for ubuntu@24.04","author":"vpa1977","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/823","summary":"Feature request for a Gradle plugin to build Gradle projects in craft-parts. The plugin was implemented in PR #1056 with gradlew fallback support and further enhanced in subsequent PRs. Issue is inactive with no maintainer response.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The requested Gradle plugin was implemented in PR #1056 (commit 87e494f5), which added craft_parts/plugins/gradle_plugin.py with gradlew fallback logic exactly as requested. Subsequent PRs #1425, #1436, and #1559 further enhanced the plugin. The issue has had no maintainer interaction and the feature is now available.","scores":{"impact":65,"quick_win":29.25,"staleness":78,"complexity":55,"confidence":85,"support_request":10},"age_days":753,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-08-20T22:54:45+00:00","updated_at":"2025-03-11T14:28:55+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":78,"complexity":55,"support_request":10,"confidence":85,"impact":65,"quick_win":29.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":2243,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"1886","title":"Make 2.x version of Charmcraft docs on RTD","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/1886","summary":"Task to publish a 2.x version of Charmcraft docs on Read the Docs to show differences from 3.x. Filed by maintainer 721 days ago, no labels, no comments, no activity for 381 days. Project has since moved to 3.x/4.x.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"No labels, no comments, and no assignee despite being 721 days old. The author is a maintainer (lengau) but the task was never triaged or prioritized. The project has since released 4.4 (commit 82e9de8b), making it unclear whether 2.x docs are still needed or if the request is outdated.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":15.0,"staleness":78,"complexity":40,"confidence":65,"support_request":5},"age_days":733,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-09-09T13:18:37+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:17:48+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":78,"complexity":40,"support_request":5,"confidence":65,"impact":25,"quick_win":15.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":22523,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"561","title":"Meson Plugin with python or gjs based app","author":"soumyaDghosh","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/561","summary":"Meson plugin does not rewrite shebangs of Python/GJS scripts it installs, unlike the python plugin, so apps fail to find the correct interpreter at runtime. Unlabeled, no maintainer response, and the code still lacks shebang handling.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no assignee, and no maintainer response — only an auto-generated Jira-sync bot comment (CRAFT-2953) from 2024-05-17. I verified in current code that craft_parts/plugins/meson_plugin.py still only runs meson setup/ninja/ninja install with no shebang rewriting, while the python plugin base class has _get_rewrite_shebangs_commands(), so the reported gap is still present and the issue is not stale-irrelevant. It needs a maintainer to categorize it (bug vs feature) and decide whether the meson plugin should gain interpreter/shebang handling.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":19.25,"staleness":78,"complexity":45,"confidence":72,"support_request":15},"age_days":1073,"labels":[],"created_at":"2023-10-06T08:04:58+00:00","updated_at":"2025-03-11T14:29:09+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":78,"complexity":45,"support_request":15,"confidence":72,"impact":35,"quick_win":19.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":12424,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"649","title":"feat(ProviderService): deprecate work_dir on instance","author":"lengau","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/pull/649","summary":"Deprecates work_dir parameter on ProviderService.instance() in favor of self._work_dir. Approved but stale (451 days inactive) with failing CI (fast tests, lint, min deps). Related to open issue #606.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"PR is approved with 0 unresolved comments but has 5 failing CI checks (fast tests on jammy/noble, minimum dependencies, lint/files, snap-tests) after 451 days of inactivity, indicating it needs rebasing against the current codebase. The related issue #606 (remove work_dir from ProviderService methods) is still open, so the deprecation step remains relevant.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":12.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":20,"confidence":80},"age_days":576,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-02-14T04:57:18+00:00","updated_at":"2025-06-06T19:55:33+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":20,"support_request":null,"confidence":80,"impact":15,"quick_win":12.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":3744,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"378","title":"charmcraft should have a way to search libraries","author":"mthaddon","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/378","summary":"Feature request for a charmcraft search-lib command to discover available charm libraries. The underlying Charmhub-hosted charm libraries feature is now deprecated (PR #2691), making this request obsolete.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue requests a search-lib command for Charmhub-hosted charm libraries, but the entire charmlibs feature has been deprecated in Charmcraft 3.4 (PR #2691 added deprecation warnings to all charmlibs commands). The feature is scheduled for removal in Charmcraft 4.0, making this request no longer relevant. The last activity was 348 days ago with no recent engagement.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":12.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":40,"confidence":85,"support_request":10},"age_days":1920,"labels":[],"created_at":"2021-06-10T16:08:29+00:00","updated_at":"2025-09-17T19:59:39+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":85,"impact":20,"quick_win":12.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":5229,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"446","title":"chore(linter): fix some format errors","author":"syu-w","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/pull/446","summary":"Linter formatting fix across 54 files. Approved by 1 reviewer but has 8 unresolved review comments. Last activity 386 days ago.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"The PR has 8 unresolved review comments from @tigarmo (who shared a screenshot on 2023-12-13) that need to be addressed before merging. While the PR is quite stale (386 days since last activity), it hasn't been superseded by another PR and the formatting changes may still be relevant.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":11.25,"staleness":75,"complexity":25,"confidence":60},"age_days":1006,"labels":[],"created_at":"2023-12-11T18:08:57+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:12:32+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":25,"support_request":null,"confidence":60,"impact":15,"quick_win":11.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":5324,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"351","title":"ExtensionError link to non-exists URL","author":"syu-w","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/351","summary":"ExtensionError doc link pointed to a non-existent snapcraft.io URL and docstrings referenced snapcraft.yaml instead of rockcraft.yaml; the code has since been refactored to use doc_slug with rockcraft docs base URLs, so the original problem appears resolved but the issue was never closed.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue (filed by maintainer syu-w) reported that ExtensionError linked to a non-existent snapcraft.io URL and docstrings said 'snapcraft.yaml' instead of 'rockcraft.yaml'. The code has since been substantially refactored: extension.py now uses doc_slug='/reference/extensions/' (resolved against rockcraft docs base URL via craft-cli), and the error-message wording was updated in #1042. The original broken URL no longer exists in the codebase, so the issue is no longer applicable, though it was never explicitly closed.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":10,"confidence":70,"support_request":0},"age_days":1108,"labels":[],"created_at":"2023-08-31T14:58:18+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:12:43+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":10,"support_request":0,"confidence":70,"impact":20,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":39785,"project_name":"craft-providers","source":"github","external_id":"449","title":"Handle SIGINT","author":"mr-cal","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-providers/issues/449","summary":"Enhancement request to add SIGINT handling to stop and remove base instances on interrupt. No SIGINT handling currently exists in the codebase. Issue has no maintainer response or labels after 1031 days.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no maintainer response, no labels beyond 'Type: Enhancement', no assignee, and zero comments. While the request is clear (add SIGINT handling to prevent orphaned base instances), it has sat unassessed for 1031 days. The grep results confirm no signal handling exists in the codebase, making this a legitimate but untriaged enhancement request.","scores":{"impact":55,"quick_win":30.25,"staleness":75,"complexity":45,"confidence":65,"support_request":15},"age_days":1039,"labels":["Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2023-11-08T11:38:56+00:00","updated_at":"2026-04-22T02:50:07+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":45,"support_request":15,"confidence":65,"impact":55,"quick_win":30.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":5389,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"285","title":"Discuss/investigate moving to tox + pyproject.toml","author":"tigarmo","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/285","summary":"Maintainer task to consolidate rockcraft's build config (tox.ini, Makefile, setup.py, setup.cfg, pyproject.toml) toward starbase. Effectively done: setup.py/setup.cfg removed in #751, tox.ini removed, and the project fully migrated to starbase (uv + Makefile).","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue's goal has been accomplished through the project's evolution: setup.py and setup.cfg were removed in 'chore: migrate setup.py to pyproject.toml (#751)', tox.ini was removed in 'chore: remove unused project files' (9e259450), and rockcraft has fully adopted starbase tooling (uv, common.mk, starflow CI) — exactly the 'closer to Starbase' aim. The issue has 0 comments and no activity for ~12.7 months, and its specific proposal (keep tox.ini) was superseded by the starbase migration, so it is no longer actionable.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":9.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":40,"confidence":80,"support_request":5},"age_days":1200,"labels":[],"created_at":"2023-05-31T12:21:33+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:12:58+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":40,"support_request":5,"confidence":80,"impact":15,"quick_win":9.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":5507,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"167","title":"Take \"stack\" of layers into account when adding a new layer","author":"tigarmo","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/167","summary":"Rockcraft's add_layer only accounts for the base image, not intermediate layers added while packing a rock, so a part-created /.rock symlink gets broken by the later .rock metadata layer. Unlabeled, no comments, still unfixed per the big spread test.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is old (1355 days, no comments/labels) but the limitation is still present: tests/spread/foreign/big/task.yaml explicitly documents it with 'docker run --rm big exec readlink /.rock | NOMATCH fake_rock_dir' and a note that symlinks between layers are not preserved. The fix requires tracking the full layer stack in add_layer/archive_layer, a non-trivial change, so it remains a valid open feature/bug rather than stale-irrelevant.","scores":{"impact":55,"quick_win":16.5,"staleness":75,"complexity":70,"confidence":70,"support_request":0},"age_days":1367,"labels":[],"created_at":"2022-12-15T18:28:45+00:00","updated_at":"2022-12-15T18:28:45+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":70,"support_request":0,"confidence":70,"impact":55,"quick_win":16.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":6742,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"5137","title":"Fails to login when Kwallet is default keyring","author":"eeickmeyer","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/5137","summary":"snapcraft login fails with RuntimeError('python-dbus not installed') on Kubuntu/Ubuntu Studio when Kwallet is the default keyring. Maintainers agreed to add python3-dbus as a stage package but no fix has been implemented in ~22 months.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainers explicitly agreed to add python3-dbus as a stage package (mr-cal: 'I agree that we should include python3-dbus as a stage package'), but the current snap/snapcraft.yaml still lacks it in the snapcraft-libs stage-packages list. The bug remains unfixed and reproducible for KDE-based distro users, making it a valid open issue despite inactivity.","scores":{"impact":55,"quick_win":44.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":20,"confidence":80,"support_request":10},"age_days":681,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-10-31T16:36:56+00:00","updated_at":"2024-11-06T17:52:44+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":20,"support_request":10,"confidence":80,"impact":55,"quick_win":44.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":5971,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"5942","title":"LXD device gets corrupted when ssh connection is closed","author":"soumyaDghosh","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/5942","summary":"Snapcraft LXD build instance fails to restart after SSH disconnect/VM reboot because the craft-state disk device points at a transient /run/user/<uid>/<pid> path that no longer exists. Unlabelled, zero comments, 245 days old.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"No labels, no assignee, and zero comments from any maintainer in 245 days, so this has never been triaged. The root cause is identifiable from the log — craft-application's state service (craft_application/services/state.py) places its state dir under $XDG_RUNTIME_DIR/<pid>, which is wiped on session end/reboot, leaving the LXD disk-/tmp/craft-state device with a missing source path. It is a real, reproducible bug (not a support question) but needs maintainer assessment of where the fix belongs (craft-application state dir location vs craft-providers device handling).","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":22.5,"staleness":75,"complexity":55,"confidence":65,"support_request":10},"age_days":258,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-12-29T07:08:40+00:00","updated_at":"2025-12-29T07:24:23+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":55,"support_request":10,"confidence":65,"impact":50,"quick_win":22.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":12135,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"939","title":"Bad error handling for shutil errors","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/issues/939","summary":"Poor error display for shutil errors during parts execution. Current code catches OSError in LifecycleService.run() and formats via PartsLifecycleError.from_os_error; referenced craft-parts#1366 is closed.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 321 days old with only a Jira-sync bot comment. The current codebase already handles this: lifecycle.py line 383 catches OSError (parent of shutil.Error) and converts it via PartsLifecycleError.from_os_error(), which formats filename and strerror into a user-friendly message. A unit test (test_parts_lifecycle_error_from_os_error) covers this path, and the referenced upstream craft-parts#1366 is closed, indicating the original trigger is resolved.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":30.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":25,"confidence":72,"support_request":5},"age_days":333,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Bug"],"created_at":"2025-10-14T14:36:38+00:00","updated_at":"2025-10-14T14:36:49+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":25,"support_request":5,"confidence":72,"impact":40,"quick_win":30.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":12767,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"306","title":"Fix & re-enable test checking for snaps","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/issues/306","summary":"Maintainer task to fix and re-enable the commented-out test_get_basic_items integration test in tests/integration/launchpad/test_anonymous_access.py, which broke when the author added a private snap. Still commented out at HEAD with a TODO referencing this issue; dormant since April 2024.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The test is still commented out at HEAD (line 52 of test_anonymous_access.py) with a TODO explicitly referencing issue #306, so the work is clearly scoped and still applicable rather than obsolete. It is the author's own maintainer task with a known root cause (test depends on the author's personal snaps, which are now private), so it should stay open despite 15 months of inactivity; closing as stale would be wrong since the problem persists in the code.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":11.25,"staleness":75,"complexity":25,"confidence":80,"support_request":0},"age_days":885,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-04-10T21:26:10+00:00","updated_at":"2025-05-23T17:26:57+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":25,"support_request":0,"confidence":80,"impact":15,"quick_win":11.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":22410,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"674","title":"Symlink fixing logic doesn't consider relative location changes when using organize","author":"dilyn-corner","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/674","summary":"Symlink fixing in normalize.py converts absolute symlinks to relative but doesn't account for organize moving the link or target, producing broken links. Untriaged, no labels, no maintainer response since 2024-02; only a Jira sync bot comment in 2024-05.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"No maintainer has acknowledged, labelled, or responded to this issue since it was filed in Feb 2024; the only comment is an automated Jira sync bot message. The bug is real and reproducible (confirmed by the code in normalize.py _fix_symlink which computes relpath without considering organize), but it has not been triaged.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":17.5,"staleness":75,"complexity":65,"confidence":70,"support_request":0},"age_days":928,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-02-28T00:02:23+00:00","updated_at":"2025-03-11T14:28:35+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":65,"support_request":0,"confidence":70,"impact":50,"quick_win":17.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":21804,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1281","title":"go-use go plugin test fails on non-amd64 architectures","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/1281","summary":"test_go_use fails on arm64 due to missing Go toolchain. Superseded by issue #1313 which is the active tracking issue; test is already skipped on aarch64 with a reference to #1313. This issue has 0 comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction in 356 days.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The test_go_use failure is already handled via a skipif decorator in test_go.py that references issue #1313 (\"go-use test isn't working on arm64 github-hosted runners\"), which is open, triaged by a maintainer, and is the active tracking issue. This issue (#1281) has zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer response in 356 days, making it a redundant duplicate of #1313.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":10.5,"staleness":75,"complexity":30,"confidence":82,"support_request":10},"age_days":368,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-09-10T04:38:09+00:00","updated_at":"2025-09-10T04:38:09+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":30,"support_request":10,"confidence":82,"impact":15,"quick_win":10.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":21805,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1280","title":"gradle plugin gradlew test fails on architectures other than amd64 and arm64","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/1280","summary":"Gradle plugin integration test fails on non-amd64/arm64 architectures (s390x). The specific test (test_gradle_plugin_gradlew) has since been refactored into test_gradle_plugin with different assertions, and CI was expanded to more platforms, but no maintainer has confirmed resolution.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 356 days old with zero comments and no maintainer response. The originally failing test (test_gradle_plugin_gradlew) no longer exists in that form; it was refactored into test_gradle_plugin with a use_gradlew parameter and a corrected assertion path (build/build/test.txt per #1320). CI was expanded to more platforms in #1303. A maintainer needs to verify whether the current test suite passes on s390x to determine if this is resolved or still open.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":40,"confidence":60,"support_request":5},"age_days":368,"labels":["Type: Bug"],"created_at":"2025-09-10T03:24:51+00:00","updated_at":"2025-09-10T04:36:59+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":40,"support_request":5,"confidence":60,"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":12333,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"741","title":"Refactor to return packaged resource names","author":"cmatsuoka","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/issues/741","summary":"Maintainer-authored refactor task to make the package service's pack method return resource names so the temporary resource_map property can be removed. Still open, unlabelled, and inactive for ~15 months; the property remains in current code.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The author (cmatsuoka) is a maintainer who filed this as a scoped internal task, and the target code is unchanged: craft_application/services/package.py still defines the resource_map property with a comment saying the two calls 'can be consolidated in the next API change', and lifecycle.py still reads self._services.package.resource_map. It is not stale-irrelevant (the workaround still exists), but it has no labels, assignee, or comments in 465 days, so it needs a maintainer to prioritise or explicitly defer it.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":11.25,"staleness":75,"complexity":55,"confidence":65,"support_request":0},"age_days":507,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-04-23T19:55:24+00:00","updated_at":"2025-05-23T17:26:29+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":55,"support_request":0,"confidence":65,"impact":25,"quick_win":11.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":39796,"project_name":"craft-providers","source":"github","external_id":"657","title":"check the storage space before trying to spin container","author":"dariuszd21","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-providers/issues/657","summary":"Enhancement to check storage space before container creation to prevent confusing build failures. Open 715 days with unclear ownership between craft-providers and craft-application.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"This enhancement has been open for 715 days with only one maintainer comment from @lengau questioning whether it belongs in craft-providers or craft-application. No implementation or clear path forward has emerged. The issue is both inactive and has become less relevant given the unresolved ownership question and the long period without action.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":37.5,"staleness":75,"complexity":25,"confidence":65,"support_request":20},"age_days":723,"labels":["Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2024-09-19T15:06:13+00:00","updated_at":"2026-04-22T02:48:41+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":25,"support_request":20,"confidence":65,"impact":50,"quick_win":37.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":39809,"project_name":"craft-providers","source":"github","external_id":"882","title":"Run integration tests on non-x86 architectures","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-providers/issues/882","summary":"Enhancement to run integration tests on non-x86 architectures (ARM64). Feature implemented via PR #921 which added ubuntu-24.04-arm to CI test platforms.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The feature requested in this issue has been implemented. Commit 55b77b8 (\"ci: enable integration tests on arm64 (#921)\") added ubuntu-24.04-arm to both fast-test-platforms and slow-test-platforms in .github/workflows/qa.yaml. The current CI configuration confirms ARM64 integration tests are now running, making this issue no longer applicable.","scores":{"impact":60,"quick_win":45.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":25,"confidence":75,"support_request":10},"age_days":270,"labels":["Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2025-12-16T15:16:03+00:00","updated_at":"2026-04-22T02:48:27+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":25,"support_request":10,"confidence":75,"impact":60,"quick_win":45.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":7344,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"4533","title":"Regression: Interacting with an on-prem store proxy fails indiscriminately","author":"atomcult","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/4533","summary":"Snapcraft 7.5.4/8.0.1 fails with 'Credentials could not be parsed. Expected valid Candid credentials' when using SNAPCRAFT_STORE_AUTH=onprem with a store proxy. No maintainer response; onprem support still exists in current code via OnPremClient.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no assignee, and zero comments from any maintainer, showing no sign of triage. It reports a genuine regression in onprem store proxy interaction (a real bug, not a support request), and onprem support still exists in the current codebase (OnPremClient), so it is not clearly outdated. However, the reported versions (7.5.4/8.0.1) are old and the exact root cause is unconfirmed, so it needs maintainer assessment before any close decision.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":20.25,"staleness":75,"complexity":55,"confidence":55,"support_request":10},"age_days":964,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-01-22T19:39:57+00:00","updated_at":"2025-03-13T18:36:57+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":55,"support_request":10,"confidence":55,"impact":45,"quick_win":20.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":46501,"project_name":"fetch-service","source":"github","external_id":"401","title":"Add format inspection smoke tests","author":"cmatsuoka","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/fetch-service/issues/401","summary":"Feature request to add spread tests for format inspection of supported artifact types to prevent bad interactions between inspectors. Unlabelled, no maintainer response, 390 days inactive.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no maintainer comments, and no assignee after 443 days. While the request to add format inspection smoke tests is valid and the project still has many inspectors that would benefit from such tests, it has received zero maintainer engagement. The issue needs triage to determine if this work is still desired or has been superseded.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":28.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":30,"confidence":65,"support_request":10},"age_days":447,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-06-23T00:30:29+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:15:35+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":30,"support_request":10,"confidence":65,"impact":40,"quick_win":28.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":12205,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"869","title":"State service doesn't catch permission errors in XDG_RUNTIME_DIR","author":"mr-cal","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/issues/869","summary":"State service crashes with an internal error when XDG_RUNTIME_DIR is not writable, since _create_state_dir only catches FileExistsError. Should raise a user-friendly error or fall back to the home temp dir. Unfixed at HEAD; no comments in over a year.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The bug is still present at HEAD: _create_state_dir (state.py) only catches FileExistsError, so a PermissionError from mkdir on XDG_RUNTIME_DIR still surfaces as an internal error, and the /tmp-based fallback to util.get_home_temporary_directory() does not cover permission failures. It is a well-scoped, labelled (Type: Bug) report from a maintainer with concrete repro sources (Treeherder log, Matrix thread), so it should stay open despite 374 days of inactivity; it is not stale-closable because the problem is still reproducible.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":31.5,"staleness":75,"complexity":30,"confidence":78,"support_request":5},"age_days":386,"labels":["Type: Bug"],"created_at":"2025-08-22T13:43:43+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-22T13:44:51+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":30,"support_request":5,"confidence":78,"impact":45,"quick_win":31.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":12067,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"1007","title":"fix(craft-test): enable spread tests with 26.04 backends","author":"bepri","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/pull/1007","summary":"Adds temporary workaround to enable spread tests on ubuntu-26.04 backends by using ubuntu-daily:26.04 images. PR is 207 days old with no review activity; the 26.04 backend support was later added via PR #1155 and test infrastructure was restructured in #1168.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The PR is 207 days old with zero comments and no review activity. The underlying issue (ubuntu:26.04 not existing in LXD) has since been addressed by PR #1155 which added 26.04/26.10 spread backend support, and the test infrastructure has evolved significantly (PR #1168 deprecated spread.yaml in favor of per-app test yaml files). The temporary workaround this PR proposed is likely superseded by these changes.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":22.5,"staleness":75,"complexity":25,"confidence":60},"age_days":219,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-02-05T18:20:12+00:00","updated_at":"2026-02-05T18:20:12+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":25,"support_request":null,"confidence":60,"impact":30,"quick_win":22.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":16210,"project_name":"starbase","source":"github","external_id":"34","title":"codespell doesn't ignore files in `.gitignore`","author":"mr-cal","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/starbase/issues/34","summary":"codespell lint step flags files inside venv/ignored paths because it does not honor .gitignore. Maintainers agreed on a skip-list workaround; the full fix is blocked on upstream codespell. Inactive ~16 months, still open.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue was triaged and acknowledged by maintainers, who agreed on a skip-list workaround and explicitly marked it blocked by upstream codespell-project/codespell#1887. The underlying problem (codespell not respecting .gitignore) is still reproducible and not resolved, so inactivity alone does not justify closing; it remains a valid, externally-blocked item.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":13.75,"staleness":75,"complexity":45,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":1304,"labels":[],"created_at":"2023-02-17T00:34:42+00:00","updated_at":"2025-04-29T16:53:18+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":45,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":25,"quick_win":13.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":12304,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"770","title":"Pack command output option is inconsistent","author":"cmatsuoka","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/issues/770","summary":"Pack command --output behaves inconsistently: paths outside the project root silently drop artifacts inside the build instance. Triaged bug (Jira CRAFT-4580); no fix found in current code, which still has the same --output handling.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is labelled 'Status: Triaged' and 'Type: Bug' by maintainer cmatsuoka, and the reported behavior still exists in the code: PackCommand in craft_application/commands/lifecycle.py still defines --output with help 'Output directory for created packages.' and passes it to package.set_output_dir() with no validation or error for out-of-root paths. No commit in the history addresses this, so it remains a valid, open design/bug decision (error out vs. deprecate) rather than something to close.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":60,"confidence":80,"support_request":5},"age_days":477,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Bug"],"created_at":"2025-05-23T12:42:46+00:00","updated_at":"2025-06-07T00:12:31+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":60,"support_request":5,"confidence":80,"impact":45,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":16282,"project_name":"starflow","source":"github","external_id":"101","title":"Add pristine-ubuntu-action to hosted runners","author":"Copilot","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/starflow/pull/101","summary":"Adds lengau/pristine-ubuntu-action@v0 as first step of setup-python-runner/action.yaml, gated to GitHub-hosted Linux runners, to free disk and prevent runner-update breakage. 3-line change, 268 days old, no review, CI partially failing.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"The PR is 268 days old with 0 comments and 0 reviewers, but it is still applicable: setup-python-runner/action.yaml exists at HEAD without the pristine step, no commit in history implements it, and issue canonical/starflow#100 remains open. It's a small, well-scoped change that just needs a maintainer to review it and address the failing CI checks (including Conventional Commits and many Default inputs/LXD 6 jobs).","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":36.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":10,"confidence":80},"age_days":281,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-12-06T08:04:36+00:00","updated_at":"2025-12-06T08:14:41+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":true,"staleness":75,"complexity":10,"support_request":null,"confidence":80,"impact":40,"quick_win":36.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":39575,"project_name":"starflow","source":"github","external_id":"155","title":"feat: new secscan action","author":"bepri","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/starflow/pull/155","summary":"Adds a new secscan action for automated security scanning on tags or monthly workflows. Inactive for 73 days with 17 unresolved review comments and no reviewer engagement.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The PR has been inactive for 73 days with 17 unresolved review comments and zero reviewer engagement, indicating it is effectively abandoned. The author has not addressed the review feedback in over two months, and the unresolved comments suggest the PR needs changes that are no longer being pursued.","scores":{"impact":60,"quick_win":27.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":55,"confidence":45},"age_days":82,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-06-22T18:15:07+00:00","updated_at":"2026-06-23T19:37:42+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":55,"support_request":null,"confidence":45,"impact":60,"quick_win":27.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":12351,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"722","title":"test: CI backend needs to be system-specific","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/issues/722","summary":"CI backend for spread tests needs to be system-specific; references a commit and has an internal Jira ticket (CRAFT-4472) but no maintainer response or labels.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue was filed by a maintainer (lengau) with no labels, no assignee, and only an automated Jira-sync bot comment. The referenced commit d4a3eb9 is not found in the current repo history, and the codebase now has a `_get_ci_system()` method and `craft:{ci_system}` prefix logic in `testing.py`, suggesting the system-specific CI backend behavior may already be partially or fully implemented. However, without confirmation that the referenced commit's concern is fully resolved, this needs triage to determine if it's still valid or can be closed as fixed.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":40,"confidence":55,"support_request":10},"age_days":520,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-04-10T15:38:01+00:00","updated_at":"2025-05-23T17:26:42+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":55,"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":12354,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"719","title":"Raise an error for unfiltered build plans","author":"mr-cal","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/issues/719","summary":"create_build_plan() has undefined behavior when platforms, build_for, and build_on are all None (dedupes to one build-on per platform). Requests raising an error. No labels or maintainer reply beyond a Jira bot; behavior still present in current code.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no assignee, and its only comment is the auto-generated Jira-sync bot (CRAFT-4458) — no maintainer has categorised or prioritised it. I confirmed the behavior is still present in craft_application/services/buildplan.py (create_build_plan does not raise when all filters are None), and noted lifecycle.py deliberately calls it with all-None as a fallback, so the fix needs a design decision. It is a valid, still-reproducible report that needs triage.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":20.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":50,"confidence":78,"support_request":5},"age_days":527,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-04-03T17:10:55+00:00","updated_at":"2025-05-23T17:26:43+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":50,"support_request":5,"confidence":78,"impact":40,"quick_win":20.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":12175,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"899","title":"test: simpler checker no-op for grammar","author":"lengau","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/pull/899","summary":"Simplifies the grammar checker no-op in craft_application/grammar.py (+1/-8 lines). Approved by 1 reviewer, all CI passing, but unmerged for 356 days. The self_check function and checker=self_check still exist in main.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The PR is approved, all CI checks pass, and the targeted code (self_check function and checker=self_check at grammar.py:181-191) still exists unchanged in main. The referenced craft-grammar#131 is closed, confirming the dependency is resolved. The change remains valid and applicable despite 356 days of inactivity.","scores":{"impact":10,"quick_win":9.5,"staleness":75,"complexity":5,"confidence":72},"age_days":368,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-09-09T16:03:14+00:00","updated_at":"2025-09-09T16:53:52+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":5,"support_request":null,"confidence":72,"impact":10,"quick_win":9.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":12397,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"676","title":"Use a different instance name when using the fetch service","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/issues/676","summary":"Feature request to use a distinct provider instance name when the fetch service is enabled, preventing fetch-service runs from destroying the normal build instance. No maintainer response, labels, or linked PRs; last activity 465 days ago.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is unlabelled with zero comments and no maintainer acknowledgement in 543 days, so it has not been triaged. The underlying concern appears partially addressed: commit e931a597 'wipe existing instances when using the fetch-service' and the current _get_instance_name() in services/provider.py already incorporate the work_dir inode and platform into the instance name, but there is no explicit fetch-service-specific naming suffix, so the request may still be valid. A maintainer should confirm whether the current naming scheme satisfies the goal before closing or implementing.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":26.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":35,"confidence":70,"support_request":5},"age_days":555,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-03-07T00:21:00+00:00","updated_at":"2025-05-23T17:26:32+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":35,"support_request":5,"confidence":70,"impact":40,"quick_win":26.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":12467,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"606","title":"Remove `work_dir` argument from `ProviderService` methods","author":"mattculler","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/issues/606","summary":"Refactor request to remove redundant work_dir arguments from ProviderService methods in favor of self._work_dir. Open since 593 days ago with only a bot ticket sync and a failed reproduction attempt; no labels or maintainer triage.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is a legitimate internal refactoring request filed by a maintainer (mattculler) but has no labels, no assignee, and no substantive maintainer response beyond a bot-created Jira ticket (CRAFT-3899) and a 'Could not reproduce' comment that merely failed to run the vi command. The code still shows the inconsistency: instance() and _get_instance_name() take work_dir parameters while clean_instances() uses self._work_dir, so the issue remains valid and needs proper triage.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":13.75,"staleness":75,"complexity":45,"confidence":80,"support_request":5},"age_days":605,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-01-15T17:08:38+00:00","updated_at":"2025-05-23T17:26:49+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":45,"support_request":5,"confidence":80,"impact":25,"quick_win":13.75,"has_related_links":false},{"id":12375,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"698","title":"Some valid `spread.yaml` files don't get parsed correctly.","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/issues/698","summary":"Bug report that some valid spread.yaml files accepted by spread fail to parse in craft's test command, e.g. a backend systems list containing a plain string like 'ubuntu-18.04-64'. No maintainer response or labels; only an auto Jira-sync bot comment. Likely already fixed by PR #737 (accept string system models).","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"No maintainer has acknowledged, labelled, or responded to this issue — the only comment is the auto-generated Jira-sync bot message (CRAFT-4375). The reported case (string entries in backend systems) appears addressed by commit 2f11fe33 'fix(SpreadBackend): accept string system models (#737)', which added str support to the systems list, but the issue title says 'some valid files' so a maintainer should confirm whether the specific repro is covered before closing.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":35.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":30,"confidence":60,"support_request":10},"age_days":536,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-03-25T22:50:19+00:00","updated_at":"2025-05-23T17:26:44+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":30,"support_request":10,"confidence":60,"impact":50,"quick_win":35.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":12524,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"549","title":"Spec and prototype omitting the traceback for known user errors","author":"tigarmo","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/issues/549","summary":"Design a mechanism to suppress craft-tool tracebacks for known user errors (e.g. plugin build failures) to reduce log noise. Open since 2023, tracked as CRAFT-3655, no maintainer response beyond the Jira sync bot.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is a design/spec task from a maintainer (tigarmo) with no labels, no assignee, and no substantive maintainer discussion — only the Jira sync bot comment. It requires architectural decisions about how to distinguish known user errors from internal bugs in the error emission path (craft_cli emit.error / _emit_error), so it needs triage and prioritization rather than closure.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":60,"confidence":60,"support_request":10},"age_days":674,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-11-07T12:35:14+00:00","updated_at":"2025-05-23T17:26:54+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":60,"support_request":10,"confidence":60,"impact":45,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":12678,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"395","title":"Put public utility items in the top-level namespace","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/issues/395","summary":"Feature request to re-export public utility functions (e.g. get_host_architecture) in the top-level craft_application namespace. Unlabelled, 0 comments, no activity for ~15 months; not implemented in current code.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is unlabelled, has 0 comments, no assignee, and no maintainer interaction for 465 days, showing no sign of triage or prioritization. It is not a close_stale candidate because the request is still applicable — craft_application/__init__.py still does not re-export util items like get_host_architecture, and the repo remains active. A maintainer needs to decide whether to implement the re-exports or close it as not worth the API surface.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":16.25,"staleness":75,"complexity":35,"confidence":80,"support_request":10},"age_days":780,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-07-24T15:10:32+00:00","updated_at":"2025-05-23T17:26:48+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":35,"support_request":10,"confidence":80,"impact":25,"quick_win":16.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":12594,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"479","title":"Application: treat CraftError-like exceptions as CraftErrors","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/issues/479","summary":"Application should treat exceptions following CraftError's message/resolution pattern as CraftErrors instead of converting them to internal errors. Open since 2023, last activity 465 days ago, no labels or maintainer response beyond a Jira sync bot comment.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue was filed by a maintainer (lengau) with no labels, no assignee, and no substantive maintainer response beyond the Jira sync bot comment. A related commit deca76bd 'fix(Application): catch all craft-like errors (#695)' exists in the history, suggesting partial or related work was done, but it's unclear if it fully addresses this issue. The issue needs triage to determine if it's already resolved by that commit or still open.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":40,"confidence":70,"support_request":0},"age_days":723,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-09-19T12:10:26+00:00","updated_at":"2025-05-23T17:26:57+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":40,"support_request":0,"confidence":70,"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":12567,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"506","title":"Allow craft tools to function inside a LXD parent container when performing a LXD managed build","author":"flotter","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/issues/506","summary":"Request to support nested LXD managed builds (craft tools in a LXD parent container, e.g. Spread LXD backend), needing idmap range agreement. Maintainer asked for workaround details in Oct 2024; no reporter response since.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is labelled Type: Enhancement and was triaged, but the maintainer (mr-cal, 2024-10-07) asked 'Can you specify what workarounds you did?' and the reporter has not responded for ~12 months (last activity 362 days ago), exceeding the 6-month threshold for an unanswered information request. The underlying idmap handling is still hardcoded in craft-providers (lxd_instance.py:410), so the feature remains unimplemented, but the unanswered detail request justifies closing as stale.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":15.75,"staleness":75,"complexity":65,"confidence":78,"support_request":10},"age_days":707,"labels":["Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2024-10-05T11:08:22+00:00","updated_at":"2025-09-03T19:09:04+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":65,"support_request":10,"confidence":78,"impact":45,"quick_win":15.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":12703,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"370","title":"Bad error report when the lxd instance is already running","author":"tigarmo","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/issues/370","summary":"craftapp pack fails with a confusing 'Failed to start' LXDError when a prior crashed pack left the LXD instance running; the underlying lxc error 'The instance is already running' is not surfaced. Untriaged, no maintainer response, last activity 465 days ago.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no assignee, and only an auto-generated Jira-sync bot comment (CRAFT-3093) — no maintainer has acknowledged, categorised, or responded to it, so it needs triage. It is a genuine bug report with a clear reproduction (run craftapp pack twice concurrently) and a concrete log showing lxc stderr 'The instance is already running' being swallowed into a generic 'Failed to start' error. It is not stale-dead: the underlying code path (craft-providers lxc.start raising LXDError 'Failed to start') still exists, and related work in craft-providers (e.g. d5c194b 'store and check PID when launching instances', and the 'already running but not available' handling in lxd_instance.py) shows this area is actively maintained, so closing as stale would be premature.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":24.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":40,"confidence":60,"support_request":10},"age_days":801,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-07-03T12:41:55+00:00","updated_at":"2025-05-23T17:27:00+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":60,"impact":40,"quick_win":24.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":13474,"project_name":"craft-cli","source":"github","external_id":"266","title":"Provide a way for apps to warn users about deprecated features.","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-cli/issues/266","summary":"Feature request for a deprecation-warning API on the Emitter (message, docs link, optional error version, once-per-run, disableable). Core warning() method was added in PR #358; extra features remain unimplemented. Inactive ~1.5 years.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The core ask — a warning() method on the Emitter — was implemented in PR #358 (commit 4736b39), which closed craft-cli#256 'Add emit.warning()', and the method now exists in craft_cli/messages.py. The remaining enhancements (docs link, version param, once-per-run dedup, disable switch) are unimplemented, but the issue has had no maintainer engagement for ~1.5 years (only an auto-generated Jira bot comment), so it is stale and the main deliverable exists; the leftover enhancements can be re-filed if still wanted.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":22.75,"staleness":75,"complexity":35,"confidence":72,"support_request":0},"age_days":773,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-07-31T19:33:39+00:00","updated_at":"2025-03-10T18:59:08+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":35,"support_request":0,"confidence":72,"impact":35,"quick_win":22.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":1479,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2667","title":"tests: add reproducer for remote-build ProjectService AttributeError (#2598)","author":"lengau","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/pull/2667","summary":"Adds failing unit test reproducing #2598 (remote-build AttributeError) plus fix in remote.py and lifecycle.py. Superseded: #2681 already fixed remote.py and added its own regression test. lifecycle.py fix still unmerged. Inactive 128 days.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"PR #2681 (commit dea7d9a0) already fixed the remote.py bug and added its own regression test (test_remote_build_project_name_attr_regression in tests/unit/commands/test_remote.py), making this PR's primary purpose obsolete. The PR has been inactive for 128 days. The remaining lifecycle.py fix (line 116 still uses self._services.project without .get()) is a separate concern better addressed in a fresh PR.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":28.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":20,"confidence":82},"age_days":144,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-04-22T03:05:27+00:00","updated_at":"2026-04-22T04:23:20+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":20,"support_request":null,"confidence":82,"impact":35,"quick_win":28.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":7076,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"4802","title":"No debug information about conflicting files in staging error in the launchpad build log","author":"seb128","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/4802","summary":"Launchpad snapcraft builds only print the brief staging-conflict error, not the list of conflicting files; reporter expects details in the build log. Unlabelled, no maintainer response since the 2024-05-09 Jira sync bot comment.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"No labels, no assignee, and the only comment is the autogenerated Jira-sync bot (CRAFT-2907), so no maintainer has assessed it. The bug is real and reproducible: the Launchpad log shows only 'Failed to stage: parts list the same file with different contents or permissions.' plus a 'Full execution log:' path, while the local build shows the detailed 'Parts ... list the following files' message, indicating snapcraft's error handling drops the details field. The fix likely lives in snapcraft's error display (PartsLifecycleError path in snapcraft/parts/parts.py) or craft-application's error rendering, so it needs triage to confirm the right component.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":22.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":45,"confidence":60,"support_request":5},"age_days":856,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-05-09T15:26:30+00:00","updated_at":"2025-03-13T18:36:46+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":45,"support_request":5,"confidence":60,"impact":40,"quick_win":22.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":1612,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2526","title":"docs: add a description to the charmcraft reference page","author":"lengau","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/pull/2526","summary":"Adds a 3-line description to the charmcraft reference page. Open 260 days, no maintainer review, 0 approvals. Two macOS fast-test CI jobs failing; ty type-check notification only. Diff is trivial docs change.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"The PR is a trivial 3-line docs addition by a maintainer (lengau) but has sat unreviewed for 260 days. No evidence the change was superseded or the target file was removed — docs/reference/ is still actively maintained. The failing macOS fast-test jobs (macos-14-large, macos-13) are unrelated to a docs-only diff and the ty type-check failures are pre-existing code issues, not caused by this PR. A maintainer should quickly review and merge or close.","scores":{"impact":10,"quick_win":9.5,"staleness":75,"complexity":5,"confidence":55},"age_days":275,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-12-11T19:24:05+00:00","updated_at":"2025-12-11T19:24:36+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":5,"support_request":null,"confidence":55,"impact":10,"quick_win":9.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":1631,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2507","title":"Cannot build charm when base is Questing and build-base is devel","author":"lmlg","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/2507","summary":"charmcraft pack fails with 'Couldn't get EOL data for devel' when base=ubuntu@25.10 and build-base=ubuntu@devel on charmcraft 4.0.1. Unlabelled, no maintainer activity in 262 days; devel-base support has since been expanded in later releases.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"No labels, no comments, no maintainer acknowledgement in 266 days, so it has not been triaged. The error string 'Couldn't get EOL data for devel' does not appear in the charmcraft repo (grep found no matches), indicating it originates in a dependency (craft-providers/craft-application), and later commits (#2321, #2478, #2524) added/expanded devel and 25.10 base support, so a maintainer needs to confirm whether it is still reproducible on a current release before closing.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":55,"confidence":55,"support_request":10},"age_days":281,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-12-05T21:22:04+00:00","updated_at":"2025-12-09T14:30:26+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":55,"support_request":10,"confidence":55,"impact":40,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":13612,"project_name":"craft-cli","source":"github","external_id":"128","title":"Greeting doesn't output as expected","author":"mr-cal","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-cli/issues/128","summary":"craft-cli Emitter logs the greeting when set_mode() is called a second time with a different verbosity (e.g. snapcraft env var vs --verbosity flag), causing greeting in quiet mode or duplicated greeting. Reported by a maintainer in 2022, no labels, no comments, no fix found in current code.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no comments, and no maintainer acknowledgement despite being filed by a maintainer (mr-cal) referencing snapcraft PR #3958, so it has never been triaged. The underlying code path still exists: craft_cli/messages.py set_mode() still emits the greeting and 'Logging execution to' lines to stderr whenever the mode changes to VERBOSE/DEBUG/TRACE, and dispatcher.py pre_parse_args() still calls emit.set_mode() after the app has already called emit.init(), so the double-set_mode scenario described is still reproducible in current code. It is a real (if cosmetic) bug, not a support request, but it is old (last activity 539 days ago) and low-severity, so it needs a maintainer to decide whether to fix or close.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":24.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":40,"confidence":70,"support_request":5},"age_days":1417,"labels":[],"created_at":"2022-10-26T16:32:23+00:00","updated_at":"2025-03-10T18:59:06+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":40,"support_request":5,"confidence":70,"impact":40,"quick_win":24.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":13521,"project_name":"craft-cli","source":"github","external_id":"219","title":"Provide limited choices for global arguments","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-cli/issues/219","summary":"Feature request to add choices and validator support to craft-cli's GlobalArgument so apps don't have to parse/validate global options themselves. Already implemented in current code (GlobalArgument has choices, validator, case_sensitive fields).","suggested_action":"close_not_a_bug","suggested_action_reason":"The requested feature is already implemented: craft_cli/dispatcher.py's GlobalArgument dataclass now has choices (list[str] | None), validator (Callable[[str], Any] | None), and case_sensitive fields, with __post_init__ enforcing that flags can't have choices/validators and lowercasing choices when case-insensitive. The issue's own example (verbosity with choices from EmitterMode) is exactly what the current code supports, so the request is satisfied and the issue can be closed as implemented.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":35.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":30,"confidence":85,"support_request":0},"age_days":975,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-01-12T01:59:22+00:00","updated_at":"2024-01-12T03:24:02+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":30,"support_request":0,"confidence":85,"impact":50,"quick_win":35.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":13694,"project_name":"craft-cli","source":"github","external_id":"45","title":"Simplify the application run/stop cycle","author":"facundobatista","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-cli/issues/45","summary":"Feature request to add an app_wrapper context manager to craft-cli that handles application bootstrapping/finishing, moving logic from Charmcraft. Open since 2021 with one maintainer design comment; no implementation found in current codebase.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"This is a legitimate architectural feature request from the maintainer (facundobatista) with a concrete design proposal (context manager wrapping Dispatcher). No evidence of implementation in the codebase (no app_wrapper found), and the issue remains relevant to craft-cli's API design. However, it has been open for ~5 years with only one comment and no labels, suggesting it may be deprioritized.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":22.5,"staleness":75,"complexity":55,"confidence":65,"support_request":0},"age_days":1747,"labels":[],"created_at":"2021-11-30T11:38:43+00:00","updated_at":"2025-03-10T18:59:12+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":55,"support_request":0,"confidence":65,"impact":50,"quick_win":22.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":13678,"project_name":"craft-cli","source":"github","external_id":"61","title":"Don't add timestamps when the subprocess already does that","author":"facundobatista","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-cli/issues/61","summary":"Request to add a sub_with_timestamps flag to emit.open_stream so Craft CLI skips its timestamp when the subprocess adds one. Author rethought it in 2022, noting emit.pause already hides duplicate timestamps; log timestamps remain but deemed fine.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The author (a maintainer) rethought this in 2022 and stated that emit.pause (added in PR #69) already prevents users from seeing multiple timestamps, with only log timestamps remaining, which they called 'probably fine.' The user-visible problem is thus resolved by a different mechanism, and the issue has been inactive for ~18 months with no labels or assignee.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":14.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":30,"confidence":80,"support_request":5},"age_days":1682,"labels":[],"created_at":"2022-02-03T18:25:14+00:00","updated_at":"2025-03-10T18:59:11+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":30,"support_request":5,"confidence":80,"impact":20,"quick_win":14.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":13557,"project_name":"craft-cli","source":"github","external_id":"183","title":"Include humanize_list function as a utility ","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-cli/issues/183","summary":"Proposal to move humanize_list from craft-parts into craft-cli as a shared utility. Step 1 is done (function and tests exist in craft_cli/utils.py), but the team pivoted to python-humanize 4.11.0 (craft-parts PR #997); issue open, inactive about 19 months.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"Step 1 is complete — humanize_list and its tests exist in craft_cli/utils.py (plus fix #425) — and the discussion pivoted to python-humanize 4.11.0, with lengau experimenting in craft-parts PR #997 (Jan 2025), making the original copy-paste plan obsolete; no activity for ~19 months. If apps migrate to python-humanize, the remaining steps (releases, app updates, cross-reference comments) are moot.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":13.75,"staleness":75,"complexity":45,"confidence":70,"support_request":5},"age_days":1072,"labels":[],"created_at":"2023-10-06T19:46:32+00:00","updated_at":"2025-01-29T23:37:57+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":45,"support_request":5,"confidence":70,"impact":25,"quick_win":13.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":40149,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"2158702","title":"Snapcraft API not answering","author":"~t-a-k","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2158702","summary":"User reports intermittent API failures from api.snapcraft.io causing build issues. No maintainer response after 67 days.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"Issue has no labels, no maintainer response, and no assignee after 67 days. While it appears to be a support request about external API availability rather than a code bug, it should be formally triaged before closing. The reporter's curl examples show intermittent 70% success rate, but this is infrastructure-level rather than application code.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":24.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":20,"confidence":70,"support_request":90},"age_days":74,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-06-30T11:17:36.316223+00:00","updated_at":"2026-06-30T11:17:36.316223+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":20,"support_request":90,"confidence":70,"impact":30,"quick_win":24.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":22546,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"538","title":"Deduplicate files that already exist in base layer","author":"cmatsuoka","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/538","summary":"Feature request to avoid priming overlay files that already exist in the base layer, to reduce image size. Open about 3 years, no labels or maintainer response, only an automated Jira sync comment. Deduplication logic still unimplemented in current code.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no assignee, and no maintainer response — the only comment is the 2024-05-17 Jira sync bot (CRAFT-2951) — so it has never been triaged despite being filed by a maintainer. It is not a stale-close candidate because the problem persists: part_handler.py's overlay prime migration still copies all overlay files without checking the base layer, and no implementing commit was found. It needs maintainer assessment to decide whether this optimization is worth the architectural effort.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":15.75,"staleness":75,"complexity":65,"confidence":75,"support_request":10},"age_days":1107,"labels":[],"created_at":"2023-09-01T13:13:51+00:00","updated_at":"2025-03-11T14:29:11+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":65,"support_request":10,"confidence":75,"impact":45,"quick_win":15.75,"has_related_links":false},{"id":22247,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"838","title":"Validate snapd payload","author":"sergiusens","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/838","summary":"Task to validate snapd API return payloads in craft_parts/packages/snaps.py to prevent TypeError crashes when result is None. Filed by maintainer, unlabelled, unassigned, inactive 538 days; code still lacks validation.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Filed by maintainer sergiusens as a clearly scoped task with a concrete reproducer (TypeError on NoneType subscriptable at line 295). The current code in _get_local_snap_info and _get_store_snap_info still uses cast(dict, snap_info.json()[\"result\"]) without validating the result is actually a dict, so the issue remains valid. No labels or assignee, but maintainer buy-in is implicit from authorship.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":29.25,"staleness":75,"complexity":35,"confidence":75,"support_request":0},"age_days":733,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-09-09T13:24:11+00:00","updated_at":"2025-03-11T14:28:53+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":35,"support_request":0,"confidence":75,"impact":45,"quick_win":29.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":1670,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2467","title":"remote-build: add support for `--build-for`","author":"sed-i","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/2467","summary":"Feature request to add --build-for flag to charmcraft remote-build for building a subset of architectures, mirroring snapcraft. No maintainer response or labels in 319 days; remote-build still lacks the flag in current code.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no comments, and no maintainer interaction in 319 days. The remote-build command in charmcraft/application/commands/remote.py still only accepts --recover, --launchpad-accept-public-upload, and --launchpad-timeout — no --build-for. The underlying craft-application framework does support build_for in its lifecycle commands (craft_application/commands/lifecycle.py), so the feature is feasible but requires wiring through the remote build service. This is a legitimate feature request that needs maintainer assessment.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":27.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":40,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":332,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-10-16T03:16:51+00:00","updated_at":"2025-10-16T03:16:51+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":45,"quick_win":27.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":1859,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2273","title":"charmcraft.yaml deleted while packing (working tree not clean)","author":"carlcsaposs-canonical","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/2273","summary":"charmcraft pack deletes charmcraft.yaml from the working tree, making git describe --dirty report -dirty on clean release builds. Reported with charmcraft 3.4.3, no maintainer response or labels in ~13 months.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"No labels, no comments, and no maintainer interaction since filing 490 days ago, so it has never been triaged. The bug is real and reproducible (dedicated repro repo, charmcraft 3.4.3) and affects release workflows relying on git describe --dirty, but I found no fix commit or related PR in the repo, so it should stay open pending triage rather than being closed as stale.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":22.5,"staleness":75,"complexity":55,"confidence":55,"support_request":5},"age_days":502,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-04-28T13:40:14+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:17:50+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":55,"support_request":5,"confidence":55,"impact":50,"quick_win":22.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":5942,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"5974","title":"feat(project): add pydantic validator for common_id field","author":"soumyaDghosh","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/pull/5974","summary":"Adds a pydantic validator for the app common_id field to catch invalid values early, fixing #5624. Open 221 days with no author activity, 3 unresolved review comments, and failing integration/OSV-scanner CI; the validator is absent from current main.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The author has not responded to 3 unresolved review comments in 221 days (far beyond the 3-month threshold for unaddressed maintainer feedback), and CI still fails on integration-spread-tests (ubuntu-22.04/24.04) and OSV-scanner. The common_id field in snapcraft/models/project.py still has no validator in main and issue #5624 remains open, so the work can be redone if maintainers still want it.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":20.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":20,"confidence":75},"age_days":234,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-01-22T05:51:35+00:00","updated_at":"2026-01-22T18:17:47+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":20,"support_request":null,"confidence":75,"impact":25,"quick_win":20.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":22427,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"657","title":"`python-extras` keyword for Python plugin","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/657","summary":"Feature request for a python-extras keyword in the python plugin to install pip extras (e.g. pip install -U .[toml]). Unimplemented in the python plugin, but the uv plugin (added later) provides uv-extras for the same need. No maintainer response; only a Jira-sync bot comment.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"No maintainer has acknowledged, labelled, or responded to this feature request — the only comment is the autogenerated Jira-sync bot (CRAFT-2520), so it remains untriaged. The python plugin still lacks a python-extras keyword (python_plugin.py only supports python-requirements/constraints/packages), but the uv plugin now offers uv-extras, so a maintainer should decide whether to implement it for the python plugin or steer users to the uv plugin.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":22.5,"staleness":75,"complexity":25,"confidence":70,"support_request":0},"age_days":947,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-02-09T06:39:27+00:00","updated_at":"2025-03-11T14:29:04+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":25,"support_request":0,"confidence":70,"impact":30,"quick_win":22.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":22771,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"311","title":"Permission changes in files are not detected","author":"facundobatista","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/311","summary":"Local source handler's check_if_outdated only compares st_mtime, so chmod changes are not detected as file updates during the pull step. Reported by maintainer with clear repro; no labels, no maintainer response beyond a JIRA bot ticket (CRAFT-2963).","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is a genuine bug with a clear reproduction (chmod not triggering re-pull), but it has no labels, no maintainer acknowledgement, and the only comment is an automated JIRA sync bot from 2024-05-17. The code in local_source.py:check_if_outdated confirms only st_mtime is compared (line 141, 147), with no st_mode/permission check. The fix is straightforward (add permission comparison) but requires triage to confirm scope and priority.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":26.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":35,"confidence":80,"support_request":5},"age_days":1419,"labels":[],"created_at":"2022-10-24T15:42:38+00:00","updated_at":"2025-03-11T14:28:46+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":35,"support_request":5,"confidence":80,"impact":40,"quick_win":26.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":22886,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"196","title":"Consider capturing all potentially invalid stage-packages before bailing","author":"sergiusens","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/196","summary":"Request to validate all stage-packages entries and report all invalid ones instead of bailing on the first. Code still raises PackageNotFound on first missing package in apt_cache.mark_packages. No fix found in commit history.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue was filed by a maintainer (sergiusens) and synced to an internal Jira ticket (CRAFT-2967), indicating it was acknowledged. However, no fix has been implemented — apt_cache.mark_packages still raises PackageNotFound on the first missing package (line 317), and part_handler.py still catches the singular error. The issue is a valid improvement request with no recent activity (last activity 538 days ago) but is not stale in the sense of being irrelevant; the code path is unchanged.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":21.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":40,"confidence":70,"support_request":0},"age_days":1620,"labels":[],"created_at":"2022-04-06T14:13:10+00:00","updated_at":"2025-03-11T14:29:23+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":40,"support_request":0,"confidence":70,"impact":35,"quick_win":21.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":22299,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"786","title":"Python plugin. Python is broken in core24 classic snaps if snap is used on an older Ubuntu LTS version","author":"NucciTheBoss","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/786","summary":"Python plugin bug: core24 classic snaps fail on older Ubuntu LTS (20.04/22.04) with 'No module named encodings'. Original problem fixed in Snapcraft 8.3.2 via PR #4946; residual follow-up tracked in snapcraft#5144. Inactive since Sept 2024.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer tigarmo stated the original issue was 'supposedly fixed in Snapcraft 8.3.2' via PR #4946 (merged Aug 1, 2024, updating pyvenv.cfg home to the final snap path) and asked the reporter to open a new issue for the residual problem, which the reporter confirmed ('Done.' — tracked as snapcraft#5144). With the original problem resolved and no activity for ~18 months, this issue has served its purpose and can be closed in favor of the follow-up.","scores":{"impact":65,"quick_win":26.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":60,"confidence":85,"support_request":10},"age_days":787,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-07-17T14:28:32+00:00","updated_at":"2025-03-11T14:28:29+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":60,"support_request":10,"confidence":85,"impact":65,"quick_win":26.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29997,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"2061517","title":"`remote-build` lacks support for selecting Snapcraft channel","author":"~saviq","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2061517","summary":"Feature request to expose Launchpad's snapcraft channel selection API in remote-build, defaulting to the local channel. Untriaged, no maintainer engagement in 871 days.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no maintainer response, and zero comments after 871 days. While it's a valid feature request (still relevant per open issue snapcraft#6384), it has never been triaged or acknowledged by a maintainer, so it needs initial assessment before any action can be taken.","scores":{"impact":55,"quick_win":30.25,"staleness":75,"complexity":45,"confidence":70,"support_request":15},"age_days":880,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-04-15T13:50:25.785662+00:00","updated_at":"2024-04-15T14:17:05.793967+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":45,"support_request":15,"confidence":70,"impact":55,"quick_win":30.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":30012,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"2073910","title":"snapcraft cannot connect through a transparent SSL proxy","author":"~rudratrivedi","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2073910","summary":"snapcraft fails with SSL CERTIFICATE_VERIFY_FAILED behind transparent MITM proxies; no system CA store option exists. Open 772 days, 0 comments, no labels, no maintainer engagement.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has never been assessed by a maintainer (0 comments, no labels, no assignee) despite being open for 772 days. The reported SSL proxy problem is a legitimate bug/feature request with a workaround (REQUESTS_CA_BUNDLE), but it requires triage to determine current relevance, whether it's a duplicate, and if it's still applicable to the current snapcraft version.","scores":{"impact":55,"quick_win":30.25,"staleness":75,"complexity":45,"confidence":50,"support_request":15},"age_days":781,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-07-23T17:27:52.485515+00:00","updated_at":"2024-07-23T17:27:52.485515+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":45,"support_request":15,"confidence":50,"impact":55,"quick_win":30.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":1889,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2243","title":"Consider adding an optional cli argument for base (including the arch) for charm release","author":"gabrielcocenza","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/2243","summary":"Feature request to add optional base/arch argument to charmcraft release command to prevent unwanted cross-base regressions during multi-base releases. No maintainer response, no labels, 0 comments, last activity 381 days ago.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no maintainer comments, and no assignee after 516 days. The ReleaseCommand in charmcraft/application/commands/store.py (line 759) confirms no --base or --arch argument exists. The underlying craft_store publisher.ReleaseRequest model would need to support base/arch targeting, making this a non-trivial feature spanning multiple layers. The reporter's own edit notes this may not affect charmcraft 3+ projects, reducing urgency.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":22.5,"staleness":75,"complexity":55,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":528,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-04-02T20:11:31+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:17:52+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":55,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":50,"quick_win":22.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":30040,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"2127927","title":"Allow {stage,build}-snaps and extensions to point to locally provided snaps","author":"~nteodosio","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2127927","summary":"Feature request to allow stage-snaps and build-snaps to reference locally provided snaps instead of only Snap Store snaps","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no maintainer response, and no activity for over 324 days. It's a feature request requiring architectural decisions that hasn't been assessed by maintainers yet.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":25.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":50,"confidence":50,"support_request":20},"age_days":332,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-10-15T13:30:19.951953+00:00","updated_at":"2025-10-15T13:30:19.951953+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":50,"support_request":20,"confidence":50,"impact":50,"quick_win":25.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":38981,"project_name":"imagecraft","source":"github","external_id":"348","title":"No loops for grub","author":"mwhudson","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/imagecraft/pull/348","summary":"Refactors grub handling to avoid loop devices, replacing special handling with a more generic approach. Stalled for 100 days pending maintainer feedback on architectural direction.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"The PR has been inactive for 100 days with no maintainer follow-up on lengau's question about whether grub could be made a parts plugin instead. Maintainer input is needed to resolve the architectural direction and determine if this approach is acceptable before the PR can progress.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":20.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":60,"confidence":65},"age_days":111,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-05-24T20:54:25+00:00","updated_at":"2026-05-26T22:35:47+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":60,"support_request":null,"confidence":65,"impact":50,"quick_win":20.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":39032,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"6263","title":"chore: add dev workshop","author":"lengau","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/pull/6263","summary":"Adds a dev workshop for snapcraft development with new workshop actions for installing git branches and managing dependencies. Approved by 3 reviewers but has 11 unresolved review comments and failing CI checks.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The PR has been inactive for 90 days with 11 unresolved review comments and multiple failing CI checks (integration-spread-tests on ubuntu-22.04/26.04, OSV-scanner, publish amd64). Despite 3 approvals, the unresolved issues and lack of follow-up activity suggest the PR is abandoned and no longer applicable in its current state.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":26.25,"staleness":75,"complexity":25,"confidence":70},"age_days":108,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-05-27T19:47:21+00:00","updated_at":"2026-06-05T20:47:14+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":25,"support_request":null,"confidence":70,"impact":35,"quick_win":26.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":46488,"project_name":"fetch-service","source":"github","external_id":"284","title":"Create a CLI tool to inspect a specific file","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/fetch-service/issues/284","summary":"Feature request to create a CLI tool for inspecting files by path. Open for 680 days with no labels, no assignee, and last activity 390 days ago. Only one maintainer comment acknowledging value.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is a feature request with no labels, no assignee, and no maintainer categorization beyond an initial comment from @cmatsuoka stating it 'can shorten and simplify development cycles.' At 680 days old with 390 days of inactivity, it needs proper triage to determine if it's still relevant or if the feature was implemented elsewhere.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":28.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":30,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":684,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-10-28T18:56:22+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:15:43+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":30,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":40,"quick_win":28.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":46491,"project_name":"fetch-service","source":"github","external_id":"295","title":"Store *CRAFT package commit in artefact metadata","author":"SuperAlpaca27","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/fetch-service/issues/295","summary":"Feature request to store CRAFT package commit hash in artefact metadata instead of version from craft.yaml. Discussed with Jira ticket CRAFT-3964 created, but inactive for 390 days.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is a valid feature request that was discussed with a Jira ticket (CRAFT-3964) created, indicating some maintainer acknowledgment. While inactive for 390 days, the request remains relevant for machine-consumers of Fetch Service Metadata who need commit hashes for querying the Store. It should be kept open for future implementation when resources allow.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":25.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":50,"confidence":60,"support_request":25},"age_days":662,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-11-19T23:30:51+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:15:42+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":50,"support_request":25,"confidence":60,"impact":50,"quick_win":25.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":46492,"project_name":"fetch-service","source":"github","external_id":"304","title":"Disambiguate artifacts type in case of multiple valid inspections ","author":"cmatsuoka","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/fetch-service/issues/304","summary":"Design decision needed for artifact type selection when multiple inspectors approve an artifact. Open for 646 days with no labels, assignee, or maintainer triage.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no assignee, and no maintainer engagement beyond the original author's comments. The last substantive activity was cmatsuoka referencing fetch-service#296 on 2025-01-20, over a year ago. While the issue describes a valid design gap (last approved inspector wins when multiple inspectors approve), it requires architectural decision-making that hasn't been initiated by maintainers.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":20.25,"staleness":75,"complexity":55,"confidence":65,"support_request":15},"age_days":649,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-12-02T14:11:27+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:15:41+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":55,"support_request":15,"confidence":65,"impact":45,"quick_win":20.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":46493,"project_name":"fetch-service","source":"github","external_id":"325","title":"Add `*Craft.yaml` relative path to `Approved` *Craft `response-inspection`","author":"Vyom-Yadav","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/fetch-service/issues/325","summary":"Feature request to add *Craft.yaml relative path to response-inspection output. Acknowledged by maintainer but inactive for 390 days with an unanswered follow-up question.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has been inactive for 390 days with no implementation progress. While @cmatsuoka acknowledged the request ('We can add the location of the yaml file relative to the project root'), Vyom-Yadav's follow-up question about the downloads array remains unanswered, and the feature was never implemented. The issue is stale and the feature may have been addressed elsewhere or is no longer relevant.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":28.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":30,"confidence":60,"support_request":10},"age_days":610,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-01-10T14:06:45+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:15:40+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":30,"support_request":10,"confidence":60,"impact":40,"quick_win":28.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":46498,"project_name":"fetch-service","source":"github","external_id":"354","title":"Set up the proxy on a random port that's queryable from the control API","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/fetch-service/issues/354","summary":"Feature request to allow proxy on random port with control API query endpoint. Unlabelled, no comments, inactive for 390 days.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no maintainer comments, and no assignee, indicating it hasn't been assessed yet. While inactive for 390 days, the feature hasn't been implemented (NewHTTPProxy still requires a port parameter) and the project remains active, so it warrants triage rather than automatic closure.","scores":{"impact":60,"quick_win":30.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":50,"confidence":60,"support_request":10},"age_days":555,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-03-06T23:54:23+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:15:37+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":50,"support_request":10,"confidence":60,"impact":60,"quick_win":30.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":46506,"project_name":"fetch-service","source":"github","external_id":"296","title":"Unable to disambiguate CRAFT package type with multiple CRAFT YAMLs","author":"SuperAlpaca27","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/fetch-service/issues/296","summary":"Fetch Service incorrectly assigns metadata.type when multiple CRAFT YAMLs exist in a single repo; no maintainer response after 658 days.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no maintainer comments, and no assignee after 658 days, so it has not yet been triaged. It is a well-structured bug report with reproduction steps and specific technical details about the Fetch Service's metadata.type assignment logic when multiple CRAFT YAMLs are present.","scores":{"impact":60,"quick_win":33.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":45,"confidence":65,"support_request":10},"age_days":662,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-11-19T23:48:29+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:15:21+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":45,"support_request":10,"confidence":65,"impact":60,"quick_win":33.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":46507,"project_name":"fetch-service","source":"github","external_id":"388","title":"fetchctl tests fail in Fedora","author":"cmatsuoka","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/fetch-service/issues/388","summary":"fetchctl tests fail on Fedora 40 because fetch-service.fetchctl command is not found during spread test execution","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no maintainer comments, no labels, and no assignee after 487 days, indicating it has never been triaged. While the issue is very old (390 days of inactivity), there's no evidence it's been resolved or is no longer applicable, so it requires maintainer assessment before deciding on closure.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":40,"confidence":60,"support_request":10},"age_days":491,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-05-09T21:06:32+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:15:18+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":60,"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":6995,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"4883","title":"Using (source-type: git; source: .) does not seem to ever realise files have changed, snap rebuild caches code changes","author":"lathiat","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/4883","summary":"Snapcraft with source-type: git and source: . never detects local file changes, reusing cached source instead of re-pulling. Maintainer confirmed behavior is incorrect but suggested using source-type: local as workaround. Issue is 794 days old with no fix.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer @lengau explicitly acknowledged the behavior is incorrect ('this behaviour is still incorrect') while suggesting source-type: local as a workaround. The issue is a genuine bug in craft-parts' GitSource where local git sources don't track file changes. The GitSource._pull_existing() method uses git fetch/reset which won't detect uncommitted local changes, and the checksum mechanism likely doesn't account for working tree modifications. This is a real bug affecting developers using local git sources, though the workaround (source-type: local) mitigates it. The issue is stale (794 days, last activity 776 days ago) but the underlying bug in craft-parts GitSource appears to still exist based on current code inspection.","scores":{"impact":55,"quick_win":33.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":40,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":807,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-06-28T08:00:17+00:00","updated_at":"2024-07-16T20:38:35+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":55,"quick_win":33.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":22544,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"540","title":"Reprime detection","author":"sergiusens","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/540","summary":"Feature request to add unprime (clean parts up to the prime point) to craft-parts for prime-directory rerouting with craft providers. Unimplemented, unlabelled, last activity a 2024 bot comment; motivating snapcraft#4219 was fixed in snapcraft itself.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"No labels, no assignee, and the only comment is a 2024-05-17 bot ticket-sync (CRAFT-2952) — no maintainer has assessed or prioritized this in ~3 years. The feature remains unimplemented (no 'unprime' in craft-parts source or history), while the motivating snapcraft#4219 was closed as fixed by snapcraft PR #4347, which 'restores legacy unprime behavior' in snapcraft itself. A maintainer should decide whether the craft-parts feature is still wanted given that workaround, or close it.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":20.25,"staleness":75,"complexity":55,"confidence":60,"support_request":0},"age_days":1107,"labels":[],"created_at":"2023-09-01T19:15:55+00:00","updated_at":"2025-03-11T14:29:10+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":55,"support_request":0,"confidence":60,"impact":45,"quick_win":20.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":22763,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"319","title":"Support `--help` flag for craftctl","author":"merlijn-sebrechts","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/319","summary":"Feature request to add a --help flag to craftctl that prints supported commands (default, set, get). No maintainer response or labels; only a Jira sync bot comment. Code still lacks the flag, but docs (PR #1091) now document the commands.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no assignee, and zero maintainer engagement — the only comment is the Jira sync bot from 2024-05-17. The --help flag is still absent from craft_parts/ctl.py (main() only prints a bare usage string when no args are given), so the request remains valid and untriaged. PR #1091 revamped the craftctl how-to docs, partially addressing the discoverability concern, but the specific CLI flag was never implemented.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":17.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":15,"confidence":75,"support_request":10},"age_days":1398,"labels":[],"created_at":"2022-11-14T13:28:18+00:00","updated_at":"2025-03-11T14:29:19+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":15,"support_request":10,"confidence":75,"impact":20,"quick_win":17.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":2002,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2130","title":"Unable to use spread artifacts with `charmcraft test`","author":"carlcsaposs-canonical","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/2130","summary":"charmcraft test cannot pass -artifacts to spread; unlabelled, 0 comments, last activity 381 days ago, similar to #2105 (verbose flag). No maintainer triage.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"No labels, no comments, no maintainer response in 577 days. The issue is a real feature gap (spread -artifacts not exposed via charmcraft test), similar to #2105 which is also open. Needs triage to determine if this is in scope.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":21.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":30,"confidence":60,"support_request":10},"age_days":590,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-01-31T07:48:43+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:17:58+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":30,"support_request":10,"confidence":60,"impact":30,"quick_win":21.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":2477,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"1652","title":"Allow `charmcraft status anycharm` for everyone","author":"taurus-forever","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/1652","summary":"Feature request to allow anonymous read access to `charmcraft status` so non-publishers can view channel/release info. A maintainer questioned the value over `juju info`; reporter pushed back. No labels, no further activity since Apr 2024.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no assignee, and no resolution. A maintainer (lengau) engaged in April 2024 with a substantive question about whether the consumer API would suffice, and the reporter responded with detailed usability arguments, but the conversation stalled with no decision. The code still calls the publisher-scoped `/v1/charm/{name}/releases` endpoint (store.py list_releases), confirming the feature has not been implemented. This requires a product/architectural decision about which data to expose anonymously, so it needs triage rather than closure.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":16.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":60,"confidence":70,"support_request":20},"age_days":880,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-04-15T16:19:45+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:18:04+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":60,"support_request":20,"confidence":70,"impact":40,"quick_win":16.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":2486,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"1643","title":"Add debugging logic to spread file","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/1643","summary":"Feature request to copy debugging logic from rockcraft's spread file into charmcraft's spread.yaml. No maintainer response, no labels, no assignee; only an auto-generated Jira sync bot comment. Untriaged and stale.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no assignee, and no maintainer response — the only comment is an auto-generated Jira sync bot message (CRAFT-2788). It is a well-scoped internal tooling improvement (copy debugging logic from rockcraft's spread file, per the linked PR comment), but it has never been triaged or acknowledged by a maintainer. The spread.yaml has been actively maintained since (e.g. #2783, #2525), so the request is still relevant, but it needs a maintainer to assess and prioritize it.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":20.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":20,"confidence":60,"support_request":10},"age_days":884,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-04-11T19:48:22+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:18:05+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":20,"support_request":10,"confidence":60,"impact":25,"quick_win":20.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":39832,"project_name":"craft-providers","source":"github","external_id":"870","title":"snapd \"daemon is stopping to wait for socket activation\" error during LXD container initialization","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-providers/issues/870","summary":"Intermittent LXD container setup failure due to snapd socket activation race condition during snap refresh wait","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"This issue has been fixed by PR #899 (commit e0f6bc7), which added retry logic using `retry_until_timeout` in `_disable_and_wait_for_snap_refresh` to handle the transient snapd state. The current code already implements this fix, making the issue no longer applicable.","scores":{"impact":65,"quick_win":48.75,"staleness":75,"complexity":25,"confidence":85,"support_request":5},"age_days":278,"labels":["Type: Bug"],"created_at":"2025-12-08T21:47:16+00:00","updated_at":"2026-04-22T02:47:45+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":25,"support_request":5,"confidence":85,"impact":65,"quick_win":48.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":13487,"project_name":"craft-cli","source":"github","external_id":"253","title":"Use a command class's `__doc__` if `overview` does not exist","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-cli/issues/253","summary":"Feature request to use a command class's __doc__ as a fallback for the overview attribute when it is not defined, improving automatic documentation. Still unimplemented; overview remains mandatory in BaseCommand.__init__ and no docstring fallback exists in the codebase.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is old (861 days, last activity 816 days ago) but the feature is still unimplemented: dispatcher.py still lists overview in the mandatory tuple and no __doc__ fallback logic exists anywhere in the codebase. It is a valid, well-scoped enhancement from a maintainer that would reduce boilerplate for command authors, so it remains relevant rather than obsolete.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":24.5,"staleness":75,"complexity":30,"confidence":80,"support_request":0},"age_days":873,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-04-22T18:03:25+00:00","updated_at":"2024-06-06T13:54:19+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":30,"support_request":0,"confidence":80,"impact":35,"quick_win":24.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":15599,"project_name":"snapcraft-rocks","source":"github","external_id":"111","title":"Failed to create rock (Failed to stage: parts list the same file or directory with different contents or permissions)","author":"asilnov","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft-rocks/issues/111","summary":"Rockcraft build from core22-8 branch fails at stage with craft_parts OverlayStageConflict: part 'snapcraft' and its overlay list the same Python 3.10 files with different contents/permissions. No maintainer response, no labels, 0 comments, 255 days old.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no assignee, and zero comments from maintainers, showing no sign of triage. The error is a real bug in craft-parts' overlay collision detection (part 'snapcraft' vs its overlay listing the same files with different contents), but the reporter did not provide the rockcraft.yaml or overlay configuration needed to reproduce, so it needs maintainer assessment before any action.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":20.25,"staleness":75,"complexity":55,"confidence":55,"support_request":25},"age_days":267,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-12-19T12:58:13+00:00","updated_at":"2025-12-19T13:03:11+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":55,"support_request":25,"confidence":55,"impact":45,"quick_win":20.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":4829,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"846","title":"docs: modify internal user guide to create a rootless rock","author":"alesancor1","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/pull/846","summary":"Docs PR converting the 'add an internal user' how-to into a 'create a rootless rock' guide covering the run-user field and manual user creation. 523 days old, 0 comments, no reviewers, no CI; target guide still exists unchanged in the repo.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"The PR has had zero maintainer engagement for ~12.5 months (last activity 381 days ago, 0 comments, 0 reviewers), but the target file docs/how-to/crafting/add-internal-user-to-a-rock.rst still exists in its original form and the rootless-rock documentation gap it addresses remains unfilled, so it is not irrelevant. A maintainer should review and likely ask the author to refresh the 11-file diff against the current docs structure (metadata #1246, kitbash #1041, ubuntu 26 base #1213).","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":22.75,"staleness":75,"complexity":35,"confidence":70},"age_days":535,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-03-26T12:18:42+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:12:49+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":35,"support_request":null,"confidence":70,"impact":35,"quick_win":22.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":5242,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"433","title":"isolate parts of a rockcraft build process from each other","author":"ca-scribner","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/433","summary":"Feature request to fully isolate each part's build environment in rockcraft (e.g. build-packages of one part leaking into others), modeled on Docker multi-stage builds. No maintainer response, labels, or activity since filing; the shared build environment is core craft-parts behavior.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction in ~3 years, so it has never been triaged. It is a legitimate architectural feature request (not a bug or support question), but the requested per-part isolation would require changes in the shared craft-parts executor, where the build environment is a single shared context (Executor takes one build_environment for all parts; craft_parts/executor/part_handler.py prepends it to every step), so it needs maintainer assessment of feasibility and scope rather than closure.","scores":{"impact":55,"quick_win":5.5,"staleness":75,"complexity":90,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":1016,"labels":[],"created_at":"2023-12-01T21:59:17+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:12:51+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":90,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":55,"quick_win":5.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":39750,"project_name":"craft-platforms","source":"github","external_id":"125","title":"Multiple platforms with `build-for: all` might need to be considered an error","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-platforms/issues/125","summary":"Design discussion on whether multiple platforms with build-for: all should be an error in craft-platforms validation logic.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue involves an unresolved architectural decision about where validation for build-for: all should live (craft-platforms vs. pydantic models in consuming apps). Maintainers @mr-cal and @lengau have engaged in discussion, with @mr-cal leaning toward moving validation to pydantic models and @lengau noting Launchpad may still need this as an error. The validation logic still exists in craft_platforms/_platforms.py's _validate_build_for_all function, and the design decision remains open.","scores":{"impact":60,"quick_win":27.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":55,"confidence":65,"support_request":0},"age_days":519,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-04-11T14:38:33+00:00","updated_at":"2025-04-15T21:14:56+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":55,"support_request":0,"confidence":65,"impact":60,"quick_win":27.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":39794,"project_name":"craft-providers","source":"github","external_id":"625","title":"Drop Centos 7 support","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-providers/issues/625","summary":"Request to drop CentOS 7 support in craft-providers, referencing charmcraft#1826 which is closed and indicates CentOS 7 removal was completed in Charmcraft 4.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The referenced issue charmcraft#1826 is closed with summary 'CentOS 7 support will be removed in Charmcraft 4 due to end-of-life status', indicating the work was completed. This craft-providers issue is a duplicate of that effort and is no longer relevant since CentOS 7 support has been dropped.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":32.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":20,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":757,"labels":["Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2024-08-16T19:07:45+00:00","updated_at":"2026-04-22T02:48:43+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":20,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":40,"quick_win":32.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":39838,"project_name":"craft-providers","source":"github","external_id":"808","title":"chore: prepare for Python 3.14","author":"lengau","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-providers/pull/808","summary":"PR adds Python 3.14 testing but is blocked on PyO3 0.26 and Pydantic 2.12. Inactive for 242 days with failing CI on Python 3.14 test jobs.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The PR has been inactive for 242 days and is blocked on external dependencies (PyO3 0.26, Pydantic 2.12). CI is failing on Python 3.14 test jobs, and similar PRs in other canonical projects (craft-parts#1435, craft-cli#377) have been merged or superseded, suggesting this PR is outdated.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":35.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":30,"confidence":70},"age_days":393,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-08-15T22:53:29+00:00","updated_at":"2026-01-05T20:46:18+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":30,"support_request":null,"confidence":70,"impact":50,"quick_win":35.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":39853,"project_name":"craft-providers","source":"github","external_id":"821","title":"Unmount nonexistent directories on start","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-providers/issues/821","summary":"Enhancement to handle mounting nonexistent directories gracefully during start, preventing start failures. Triaged but inactive for 360 days.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is a valid enhancement that has been triaged but remains inactive for 360 days. It addresses a real problem (start failures due to nonexistent directories) and hasn't been implemented elsewhere or rejected. The current code has some error handling for mount failures in _mount_shared_cache_dirs, but this enhancement could improve robustness further.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":37.5,"staleness":75,"complexity":25,"confidence":70,"support_request":15},"age_days":368,"labels":["Type: Enhancement","Status: Triaged"],"created_at":"2025-09-09T15:06:25+00:00","updated_at":"2025-09-09T15:06:37+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":25,"support_request":15,"confidence":70,"impact":50,"quick_win":37.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":5356,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"319","title":"Building for arm not possible on Raspberry Pi 3 (32 bit)","author":"ghislainbourgeois","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/319","summary":"User tried to build a ROCK for 'arm' on a Raspberry Pi 3 (32-bit, armv7l) but rockcraft rejected it because 'arm' is not a valid platform name. The correct Debian architecture name for 32-bit ARM is 'armhf', as defined in rockcraft/architectures.py. The maintainer suggested 'armv7l' but that is also incorrect. This is a usage/configuration issue, not a bug.","suggested_action":"close_not_a_bug","suggested_action_reason":"The user used 'arm' as the platform name, but rockcraft uses Debian architecture names (per commit 340064d2 'feat: use debian arch in platforms (#380)'). The correct name for 32-bit ARM is 'armhf', as shown in rockcraft/architectures.py where 'armhf' maps to go_arch='arm', go_variant='v7'. The maintainer's suggestion of 'armv7l' was also incorrect. This is a usage error, not a bug — the user should have used 'armhf' in their rockcraft.yaml platforms section.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":10,"confidence":80,"support_request":85},"age_days":1165,"labels":[],"created_at":"2023-07-05T19:31:25+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:12:46+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":10,"support_request":85,"confidence":80,"impact":20,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":5368,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"307","title":"nodejs snap installed through stage-snaps is not usable in the final image","author":"nrobinaubertin","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/307","summary":"Node.js snap staged via stage-snaps is unusable in the final rock image because the dynamic linker path /snap/core20/current/lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 is missing; reporter works around it by copying /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2. Unlabeled, no maintainer response, last activity 381 days ago.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no assignee, and zero comments, so it has never been assessed by a maintainer. It is a genuine, well-reproduced bug (node --version fails until the core20 dynamic linker is manually copied into the image), not a support question, so it should be triaged rather than closed. Related work is uncertain: commit 05489c80 (fix(lifecycle): remove usrmerge-breaking symlinks, #498) touches symlink handling in the same area but there is no evidence it specifically fixes this stage-snaps linker case.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":17.5,"staleness":75,"complexity":65,"confidence":55,"support_request":10},"age_days":1173,"labels":[],"created_at":"2023-06-27T18:44:24+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:12:47+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":65,"support_request":10,"confidence":55,"impact":50,"quick_win":17.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":42336,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"6374","title":"fix(desktop-file): verify theme icons before rewriting icon","author":"soumyaDghosh","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/pull/6374","summary":"PR to fix desktop file icon theme warning; diff targets outdated code and doesn't address the described bug","suggested_action":"close_not_mergeable","suggested_action_reason":"The PR's diff targets code that no longer exists — the strip operations were refactored into `_normalize_icon_path()` in commit f702705c6 (PR #6385). Additionally, the diff only refactors string operations and doesn't address the actual bug described in the body (checking `icon` instead of `icon_path` after theme resolution). The underlying issue (#6364) remains open.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":25.5,"staleness":75,"complexity":15,"confidence":70},"age_days":48,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-07-27T07:23:41+00:00","updated_at":"2026-08-10T15:04:53+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":15,"support_request":null,"confidence":70,"impact":30,"quick_win":25.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":5484,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"190","title":"Improve output when different parts list the same file","author":"arturo-seijas","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/190","summary":"Request to improve error output when parts list the same file with different contents/permissions. The PartFilesConflict error in craft-parts already includes part names and conflicting file list, but does not distinguish between permissions vs contents clashes. No maintainer response; issue is 1299 days old with 0 comments.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The PartFilesConflict error in craft-parts (errors.py:454) already includes part names and a list of conflicting files, addressing most of the request. However, it still reports 'different contents or permissions' without distinguishing which type of clash occurred, so the issue is not fully resolved. No maintainer has triaged or responded, but the feature is partially implemented upstream in craft-parts, making it a valid but low-priority enhancement.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":28.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":30,"confidence":70,"support_request":0},"age_days":1311,"labels":[],"created_at":"2023-02-09T13:51:10+00:00","updated_at":"2025-07-02T11:18:29+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":30,"support_request":0,"confidence":70,"impact":40,"quick_win":28.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":5916,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"6001","title":"`snapcraft clean --destructive` does not delete `.craft` directory","author":"steinbro","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/6001","summary":"Bug report: `snapcraft clean --destructive` leaves the `.craft` directory behind after `snapcraft pack --destructive`. Reported by a maintainer with full reproduction steps on Snapcraft 8.13.2; no labels, no comments, no maintainer response in 213 days.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer acknowledgement despite being filed by a maintainer (steinbro) 213 days ago, so it has never been triaged. The bug is real and reproducible (clean output shows `.craft` surviving while parts/prime/stage/overlay are removed), and the clean command lives in craft-application's lifecycle.py where the destructive-mode path calls lifecycle.clean() without removing the craft-parts state directory, so it remains a valid, actionable bug rather than stale or not-a-bug.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":22.5,"staleness":75,"complexity":25,"confidence":70,"support_request":5},"age_days":225,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-01-30T22:25:01+00:00","updated_at":"2026-01-30T22:33:14+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":25,"support_request":5,"confidence":70,"impact":30,"quick_win":22.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":5921,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"5996","title":"docs: tutorial is publishing old code","author":"medubelko","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/5996","summary":"Docs publishing pipeline failed to include PR #5929 terminal-directive changes in 8.13.2 and 8.14.0 releases; tutorial on main has since been substantially reworked, no maintainer response in 214 days","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"Filed 214 days ago by maintainer medubelko with zero comments, no assignee, and no triage labels beyond the initial Bug/Documentation tags. The specific affected releases (8.13.2, 8.14.0) are now historical and the tutorial on main has been substantially reworked (commits #6316, #6231, #6269), but there is no evidence the underlying publishing pipeline issue was diagnosed or fixed, so a maintainer needs to assess whether this is still actionable or a one-time event.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":40,"confidence":55,"support_request":10},"age_days":226,"labels":["Type: Bug","Type: Documentation"],"created_at":"2026-01-30T00:12:39+00:00","updated_at":"2026-01-30T00:14:47+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":55,"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":6149,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"5741","title":"docs: Craft a Qt5 KDE app","author":"soumyaDghosh","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/5741","summary":"Docs bug: the 'Craft a Qt5 KDE app' how-to still shows a core18-era KCalc recipe with kde-frameworks-5-core18 build-snaps, while the kde-neon extension now uses kf5-core22/kf5-core24. Maintainer asked what's outdated; reporter silent ~11 months.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer mr-cal asked on 2025-09-02 'Can you outline what's outdated?' and the issue carries the 'Status: Needs information' label, but the reporter has not replied for ~11 months, far beyond the 6-month window. The underlying problem is verifiably real (example recipe uses core18/kde-frameworks-5-core18 while kde_neon.py now uses kf5-core22/kf5-core24), so closing for reporter inactivity is appropriate and the doc fix can be picked up directly or via reopen.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":28.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":20,"confidence":80,"support_request":5},"age_days":378,"labels":["Type: Documentation","Status: Needs information"],"created_at":"2025-08-31T07:16:29+00:00","updated_at":"2025-10-07T03:30:22+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":20,"support_request":5,"confidence":80,"impact":35,"quick_win":28.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":6167,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"5721","title":"Failed to pull source: unable to determine source type of '/usr/share/snapcraft/extensions/ros2'.","author":"jkbeg","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/5721","summary":"Snapcraft 8 Docker image fails to resolve ros2 extension: get_extensions_data_dir() returns /usr/share/snapcraft/extensions but extensions are installed under site-packages/extensions. Untriaged, no maintainer activity in 374 days; same bug tracked in snapcraft-rocks#109.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"No labels, no comments, no maintainer response in 374 days, so this is untriaged. The bug is real and reproducible: get_extensions_data_dir() in extension.py:133 returns Path(sys.prefix)/share/snapcraft/extensions, which is correct for the snap (snap/snapcraft.yaml maps **/site-packages/extensions to share/snapcraft/extensions) but wrong in the Docker image where extensions land in site-packages/extensions. The identical issue is tracked in snapcraft-rocks#109 (open, acknowledged with a community workaround), confirming the root cause is in the Docker image build, not snapcraft core.","scores":{"impact":55,"quick_win":33.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":40,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":387,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-08-22T07:18:32+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-22T07:18:32+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":55,"quick_win":33.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":4828,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"847","title":"docs: update pebble page and add references to pebble docs","author":"alesancor1","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/pull/847","summary":"Docs-only PR updating the Pebble explanation page to reference official Pebble docs and cross-linking Pebble mentions on other pages (7 files, +21/-20). Review requested changes 263 days ago; author never responded; same goal pursued in newer PR #1058.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"A reviewer requested changes with 2 unresolved comments and the author has not responded in ~8.7 months (last activity 263 days ago, 0 comments), far exceeding the 3-month threshold for unaddressed feedback. The core goal — pointing the Pebble page at the official Pebble docs — is now being pursued in the newer, more focused PR rockcraft#1058, so this older 7-file PR is superseded and no longer the right vehicle.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":10,"confidence":80},"age_days":535,"labels":["Type: Documentation"],"created_at":"2025-03-26T14:37:43+00:00","updated_at":"2025-12-11T14:29:56+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":10,"support_request":null,"confidence":80,"impact":20,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":4604,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"1071","title":"spread: check that UBUNTU_PRO_TOKEN is set","author":"tigarmo","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/pull/1071","summary":"Adds UBUNTU_PRO_TOKEN check to spread.yaml. Inactive 222 days, 0 reviews, CI failing. The check is already present in the codebase via the feature/pro-sources merge (#1184).","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The UBUNTU_PRO_TOKEN check is already present in spread.yaml (lines 240-241) and .github/workflows/spread.yaml (lines 65-70), merged via commit 1987d98b (feature/pro-sources, #1184). The PR is 222 days old with zero activity, no reviews, and multiple failing CI checks, making it redundant.","scores":{"impact":10,"quick_win":9.5,"staleness":75,"complexity":5,"confidence":80},"age_days":234,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-01-21T16:35:40+00:00","updated_at":"2026-01-21T16:35:40+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":5,"support_request":null,"confidence":80,"impact":10,"quick_win":9.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":7242,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"4636","title":"Better error message when we can't find snapcraft.yaml","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/4636","summary":"Feature request to improve the error message when snapcraft.yaml is not found in the craft-application branch, adding a helpful message with a documentation link. No labels, no assignee, last activity 536 days ago.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue was created by a maintainer (lengau) as a feature request to improve the error message when snapcraft.yaml is not found. It has no labels, no assignee, and no maintainer response beyond the initial reference to PR #4611. The last activity was 536 days ago. The issue needs triage to determine if it's still relevant or if it has been addressed in the current codebase.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":25.5,"staleness":75,"complexity":15,"confidence":60,"support_request":10},"age_days":921,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-03-05T20:00:45+00:00","updated_at":"2025-03-13T18:36:54+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":15,"support_request":10,"confidence":60,"impact":30,"quick_win":25.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":5490,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"184","title":"Cache retrieved base during build","author":"jardon","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/184","summary":"Feature request to cache the fetched base image during rockcraft pack to avoid Docker Hub pull rate limits. Maintainers discussed caching strategies in Feb 2023; project has since moved to ECR registry and added an image service, but no explicit base-image caching was implemented.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels or assignee, and the last activity was over 3 years ago. While the project has evolved (switched to ECR registry in #197, added an image service), there is no evidence that base-image caching was explicitly implemented to address this specific concern. The discussion in the comments shows maintainer engagement but no resolution or closure.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":55,"confidence":60,"support_request":10},"age_days":1314,"labels":[],"created_at":"2023-02-06T16:46:45+00:00","updated_at":"2023-08-14T21:53:44+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":55,"support_request":10,"confidence":60,"impact":40,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":7567,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"4310","title":"Please include .*.hmac files by default in stage and prime","author":"xnox","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/4310","summary":"Request to include hidden .*.hmac files in default stage/prime copy patterns for FIPS kernel builds; unlabelled, no maintainer response, last activity 536 days ago.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"No labels, no comments, no assignee — no sign of maintainer triage. The reporter (xnox, a known Ubuntu kernel/snap contributor) describes a real gap: hidden .*.hmac files are not copied from CRAFT_PART_INSTALL to stage/prime, breaking FIPS kernel snaps, and works around it with an override-prime cp. No evidence in craft-parts or snapcraft that this was fixed (no 'hmac' matches in either repo), so it should be triaged rather than closed.","scores":{"impact":55,"quick_win":33.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":40,"confidence":60,"support_request":10},"age_days":1132,"labels":[],"created_at":"2023-08-07T16:09:06+00:00","updated_at":"2025-03-13T18:37:12+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":60,"impact":55,"quick_win":33.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":13192,"project_name":"craft-archives","source":"github","external_id":"102","title":"Installer tests fail on non-LTS Ubuntu versions","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-archives/issues/102","summary":"Integration test test_installer.py raised KeyError on non-LTS Ubuntu codenames (e.g. mantic) because RELEASE_TO_CLOUD used direct dict access. Fixed in PR #115 by switching to .get() and making cloud archive tests optional by distro.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The original problem is no longer reproducible: commit ff30dc3 (PR #115, 'test: make cloud archive tests optional by distro') changed line 58 from RELEASE_TO_CLOUD[VERSION_CODENAME] to RELEASE_TO_CLOUD.get(VERSION_CODENAME), eliminating the KeyError. The issue is 1049 days old with only a bot Jira-sync comment in the last 157 days, and the fix is already merged into the codebase.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":27.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":10,"confidence":88,"support_request":5},"age_days":1061,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Cleanup"],"created_at":"2023-10-17T22:38:34+00:00","updated_at":"2026-03-27T22:49:19+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":10,"support_request":5,"confidence":88,"impact":30,"quick_win":27.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":39095,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"6292","title":"docs: remove core18 references outside of release information","author":"munlicode","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/pull/6292","summary":"Documentation PR removing core18 references from how-to guides and replacing them with core22. Author asked questions about specific files but received no maintainer response.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"The PR addresses open issue #6270 to remove outdated core18 references from documentation, but the author asked questions in comments (e.g., about /docs/reference/bases.rst and whether changes were verified) that received no maintainer response. The author explicitly noted they did not verify some changes. Maintainer review is needed to validate the modifications and address the author's questions.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":24.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":20,"confidence":60},"age_days":89,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-06-15T10:43:14+00:00","updated_at":"2026-06-15T10:58:43+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":20,"support_request":null,"confidence":60,"impact":30,"quick_win":24.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":11958,"project_name":"debcraft","source":"github","external_id":"41","title":"Add test suite information to the debcraft test field.","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/debcraft/issues/41","summary":"Feature request to unify the Debian control-file Testsuite field with the craft test command in debcraft. No labels, comments, or assignee; no code references Testsuite yet.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no comments, and no assignee, showing no maintainer triage. The repo has no Testsuite references in code or commits, so the feature is unimplemented. It is a legitimate feature request that needs categorization and prioritization.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":55,"confidence":70,"support_request":0},"age_days":297,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-11-19T15:26:17+00:00","updated_at":"2025-11-19T15:26:17+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":55,"support_request":0,"confidence":70,"impact":40,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":6635,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"5244","title":"\"Edit this page on Github\" links give a 404 not found on Github","author":"Sophie-Pages","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/5244","summary":"Snapcraft readthedocs 'Edit this page on Github' links 404. Triaged as a doc bug; root cause is an upstream canonical-sphinx bug fixed in 0.4.0. Repo now pins canonical-sphinx~=0.6, so the fix is applied and the links should work.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"mr-cal noted the upstream fix shipped in canonical-sphinx 0.4.0 and 'needs to be updated in Snapcraft'; the repo now pins canonical-sphinx~=0.6 in both docs/requirements.txt and pyproject.toml, so the 0.4.0 fix is included and the 404 edit links are no longer reproducible. The issue is triaged and resolved, so it can be closed.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":21.25,"staleness":75,"complexity":15,"confidence":80,"support_request":10},"age_days":582,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Documentation"],"created_at":"2025-02-07T16:38:57+00:00","updated_at":"2025-03-19T18:44:36+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":15,"support_request":10,"confidence":80,"impact":25,"quick_win":21.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":6987,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"4891","title":"Issue a warning when building a snap that stages another snap built on a different base","author":"kian99","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/4891","summary":"Request to add a build-time warning when a snap stages another snap built on a different base, preventing runtime AppArmor denials. Open, unlabelled, no maintainer response; only an automated Jira sync comment. Inactive for ~18 months.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is unlabelled and the only comment is an automated Jira-sync bot message (CRAFT-3126) — no maintainer has acknowledged, categorised, or responded to it, so it has not been triaged. It is a legitimate feature request (build-time base-mismatch warning for stage-snaps) with a concrete failure scenario, but the repo shows no code implementing such a check (stage_snaps is only referenced in models/project.py and grammar.py), so it is not fixed and should be assessed by a maintainer rather than closed.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":20.25,"staleness":75,"complexity":55,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":801,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-07-03T12:08:58+00:00","updated_at":"2025-03-13T18:37:14+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":55,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":45,"quick_win":20.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":12723,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"350","title":"Incorrect part name when cd-ing when within the build environment","author":"sergiusens","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/issues/350","summary":"Shell prompt in snapcraft build --shell-after shows wrong part name ('parts' instead of 'digikam') when cd-ing into a part's build dir. Bug in craft_application/misc/instance_bashrc part-name detection. No maintainer response, no labels, 465 days since last activity.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The bug is real and reproducible: instance_bashrc's part-name detection logic in craft_application/misc/instance_bashrc:20 echoes the wrong part name when the user cd's into a part's build directory. The issue has no labels, no maintainer comments, and no assignee, so it has never been triaged. The 465-day inactivity alone doesn't justify closing since the underlying code path still exists in the repo.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":14.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":30,"confidence":70,"support_request":0},"age_days":844,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-05-21T20:37:55+00:00","updated_at":"2025-05-23T17:26:40+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":30,"support_request":0,"confidence":70,"impact":20,"quick_win":14.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":46468,"project_name":"fetch-service","source":"github","external_id":"518","title":"Merge bundled ACLs with custom ones","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/fetch-service/issues/518","summary":"Enhancement to merge bundled ACLs with custom ones instead of replacing defaults. Triaged but inactive for 299 days.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is triaged and represents a legitimate enhancement request from a maintainer (lengau). While inactive for 299 days, there's no evidence it has been addressed or rejected. The referenced issue #491 was closed without a public fix (deferred to Jira FETCH-50), but this ACL-specific enhancement may have different priority or scope.","scores":{"impact":55,"quick_win":30.25,"staleness":75,"complexity":45,"confidence":65,"support_request":15},"age_days":302,"labels":["Type: Enhancement","Status: Triaged"],"created_at":"2025-11-14T15:26:44+00:00","updated_at":"2025-11-14T15:27:13+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":45,"support_request":15,"confidence":65,"impact":55,"quick_win":30.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":46477,"project_name":"fetch-service","source":"github","external_id":"558","title":"chore(deps): update dependency go to v1.27.1","author":"renovate","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/fetch-service/pull/558","summary":"Renovate PR updating Go from 1.25.11 to 1.27.1 in GitHub Actions workflows. CI failing on snap-test and OSV-scanner. No maintainer comments after 236 days.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"This is a valid dependency update PR (updating Go 1.25 to 1.27 in tests.yaml and tics.yaml) but has been inactive for 236 days with CI failing on snap-test (both noble and jammy) and OSV-scanner. A maintainer needs to assess whether the CI failures are transient or indicate a real issue with the Go version update before deciding to merge or close.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":40.5,"staleness":75,"complexity":10,"confidence":65},"age_days":240,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-01-16T03:44:20+00:00","updated_at":"2026-09-03T11:57:49+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":10,"support_request":null,"confidence":65,"impact":45,"quick_win":40.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":30027,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"2090799","title":"Not possible to spawn other instances of myappid","author":"~sblantipodi","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2090799","summary":"User reports inability to spawn multiple instances of their app from within the app in strict mode; asks why snapcraft doesn't support this feature like flatpak-spawn does.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no maintainer comments, and no assignee, indicating it hasn't been assessed. The report is vague and lacks reproduction steps, error messages, or specific details about the user's use case, making it unclear whether this is a bug, feature request, or support question.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":11.25,"staleness":75,"complexity":25,"confidence":40,"support_request":85},"age_days":650,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-12-01T22:33:25.930324+00:00","updated_at":"2024-12-01T22:33:25.930324+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":25,"support_request":85,"confidence":40,"impact":15,"quick_win":11.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":46495,"project_name":"fetch-service","source":"github","external_id":"353","title":"Control from a unix domain socket","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/fetch-service/issues/353","summary":"Feature request to allow fetch service to listen on a unix-domain socket for improved security. Unlabelled, no comments, inactive for 390 days.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no comments, and no assignee despite being 551 days old. It is a legitimate feature request from a maintainer (lengau) to improve security by allowing unix-domain socket support for the fetch service, but it has not yet been triaged or acknowledged by the team. The 390-day inactivity period warrants triage to determine if this is still relevant or has been superseded.","scores":{"impact":55,"quick_win":30.25,"staleness":75,"complexity":45,"confidence":60,"support_request":0},"age_days":555,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-03-06T23:50:09+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:15:38+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":45,"support_request":0,"confidence":60,"impact":55,"quick_win":30.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":3072,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"1054","title":"Charmcraft fails to launch LXD instance with high uid (`raw.idmap=both 595156457 0`)","author":"jamesbeedy","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/1054","summary":"Charmcraft pack fails to launch LXD instance when host UID is very high (e.g. 595156457) due to raw.idmap subid conflict. Root cause identified in craft-providers; workaround found via forum post; reporter confirmed resolved. Real fix tracked in craft-providers#259 (open).","suggested_action":"close_not_a_bug","suggested_action_reason":"The bug is in craft-providers (a dependency), not charmcraft itself, and is properly tracked in canonical/craft-providers#259. The reporter confirmed the forum-post workaround 'entirely solves my problem,' and mr-cal noted the issue was left open only so others could find that workaround. With 381 days of inactivity and the real fix tracked upstream, this charmcraft issue is a duplicate of craft-providers#259 and can be closed with a pointer to the workaround and upstream issue.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":17.5,"staleness":75,"complexity":50,"confidence":85,"support_request":15},"age_days":1267,"labels":[],"created_at":"2023-03-26T09:49:15+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:18:21+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":50,"support_request":15,"confidence":85,"impact":35,"quick_win":17.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":12381,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"692","title":"internal errors for `all` platform","author":"mr-cal","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/issues/692","summary":"Pydantic internal error when using 'all' as a platform name in platforms dict instead of a user-friendly validation message. Code still skips vectorising 'all' platforms, leaving them as None. Open 525 days, unlabelled, no maintainer interaction beyond Jira bot.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"No labels, no maintainer response, no assignee — only a Jira bot comment from 2025-03-25. The code in _vectorise_platforms still explicitly skips 'all' with 'continue', leaving the value as None and triggering the raw Pydantic error. The issue references #690 (build-on: [all]) which was closed as superseded by this one, confirming it is a distinct, still-unaddressed bug.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":21.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":40,"confidence":72,"support_request":10},"age_days":537,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-03-24T23:04:16+00:00","updated_at":"2025-05-23T17:26:45+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":72,"impact":35,"quick_win":21.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":12811,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"262","title":"Refactor how managed mode and provider are determined","author":"mr-cal","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/issues/262","summary":"Technical debt: consolidate managed-mode and provider determination (currently in 2 places) into one earlier step in craft-application. Code still exhibits the split structure; no labels, no maintainer response, 15 months inactive.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"No labels, no assignee, and the only comment is the Jira-sync bot (2024-03-11) — no maintainer has triaged or acknowledged this. The code still shows the split structure: `util/platforms.py:is_managed_mode()` and `ProviderService.is_managed()` both check the env var independently, and `application.py:552` still calls `command.provider_name(parsed_args)` before `_configure_services`, so the refactor described is still applicable and not obsolete.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":11.25,"staleness":75,"complexity":55,"confidence":72,"support_request":0},"age_days":915,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-03-11T15:51:36+00:00","updated_at":"2025-05-23T17:27:00+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":55,"support_request":0,"confidence":72,"impact":25,"quick_win":11.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":13046,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"24","title":"YAML loading either needs simplification or better testing","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/issues/24","summary":"Maintainer self-filed task to simplify or add tests for the YAML loader's questioned except clause; no maintainer triage, labels, or follow-up since 2024-03.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue was filed by maintainer lengau referencing a PR #20 comment thread, asking whether the YAML loader's except clause is still needed with newer pyyaml and requesting a test if it is. No labels, assignee, or maintainer response exist beyond the Jira sync bot comment, and the last activity was 465 days ago. It is a valid internal cleanup/testing task that needs triage to determine whether the code has since changed.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":40,"confidence":55,"support_request":0},"age_days":1192,"labels":[],"created_at":"2023-06-08T21:22:38+00:00","updated_at":"2025-05-23T17:27:09+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":40,"support_request":0,"confidence":55,"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":15210,"project_name":"craft-store","source":"github","external_id":"244","title":"Rework the API to remove repetitiveness and redundancy","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-store/issues/244","summary":"API rework to expose craft_store.models.Account and craft_store.PublisherGateway, removing model redundancy. PublisherGateway is now top-level, but models still export AccountModel and duplicates remain; no labels or activity since the 2024 Jira ticket.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no assignee, and no maintainer response beyond the Jira bot's 2024-12-13 comment (CRAFT-3812), so it has never been categorised or prioritised. It is still partially valid — craft_store.PublisherGateway now exists (PR #240), but craft_store.models still exports AccountModel rather than Account and the models/publisher packages still duplicate definitions — so closing it as stale would be premature.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":12.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":70,"confidence":78,"support_request":0},"age_days":638,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-12-13T17:38:02+00:00","updated_at":"2025-05-01T16:44:00+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":70,"support_request":0,"confidence":78,"impact":40,"quick_win":12.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":13540,"project_name":"craft-cli","source":"github","external_id":"200","title":"Register the `help` command","author":"mr-cal","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-cli/issues/200","summary":"Feature request to register 'help' as a first-class command in craft-cli so 'craft help help' works instead of erroring with 'command help not found'. No labels, no comments, no activity since creation ~2.8 years ago; still unimplemented in current code.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no comments, and no maintainer response in ~2.8 years, showing no sign of triage. The underlying problem is still present in the current code: dispatcher.py handles 'help' as an implicit command in pre_parse_args() and _get_requested_help() looks up self.commands[cmdname], which fails for 'help' itself since it is never registered. The fix is straightforward (register a HelpCommand or special-case 'help' in _get_requested_help), but no maintainer has acknowledged or prioritized it.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":17.5,"staleness":75,"complexity":30,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":1039,"labels":[],"created_at":"2023-11-09T07:25:06+00:00","updated_at":"2023-11-09T07:25:06+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":30,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":25,"quick_win":17.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":13389,"project_name":"craft-cli","source":"github","external_id":"351","title":"Remove sphinx directives from overview texts","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-cli/issues/351","summary":"Enhancement to strip sphinx directives (e.g. :doc:, :ref:) from command overview texts in CLI help output, following the precedent of #306 which removed reST double backticks. Triaged by maintainer, no PR or assignee, dormant ~14 months.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is triaged (labeled Status: Triaged, Type: Enhancement) and the underlying problem is confirmed still present: craft_cli/helptexts.py line 327 only strips reST double backticks via re.sub(r\"(?<!`)``(?!`)\", \"\", overview) but does not handle sphinx role directives like :doc: or :ref:. The referenced use case (charmcraft PR #2347) and the precedent (#306, merged) make the scope clear. No PR has been filed and no assignee is set, so it remains a valid open enhancement.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":22.75,"staleness":75,"complexity":35,"confidence":78,"support_request":0},"age_days":444,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2025-06-25T18:36:33+00:00","updated_at":"2025-06-25T18:36:54+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":35,"support_request":0,"confidence":78,"impact":35,"quick_win":22.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":5057,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"618","title":"Update snapstore page for rockcraft","author":"dariuszd21","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/618","summary":"Maintainer task to add source/docs/issue links and possibly a screenshot to the rockcraft Snap Store page. Core link request appears addressed via adopt-info + [project.urls] in pyproject.toml; no labels or maintainer response in 381 days.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The main technical ask (links to sources, docs, issues) is addressed by adopt-info in snap/snapcraft.yaml combined with [project.urls] in pyproject.toml (added in #751), which maps Project-URL entries to store metadata. The remaining ask (screenshot) is a Snap Store dashboard task outside this repo. Issue is 796 days old with no maintainer engagement beyond the Jira bot in 381 days.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":17.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":15,"confidence":60,"support_request":10},"age_days":808,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-06-26T16:28:32+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:12:50+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":15,"support_request":10,"confidence":60,"impact":20,"quick_win":17.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":13398,"project_name":"craft-cli","source":"github","external_id":"342","title":"Fix all warnings in RTD builds","author":"bepri","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-cli/issues/342","summary":"RTD Sphinx build emits 'more than one target found' warnings for CommandGroup and BaseCommand cross-references in helptexts.py docstrings. Filed by maintainer bepri 482 days ago; no labels, comments, or assignee. Current docs/conf.py excludes *dispatcher* from apidoc, which may already resolve the ambiguity, but unverified.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"No labels, no maintainer response, no assignee, and 482 days of inactivity indicate this was never triaged. The current docs/conf.py run_apidoc excludes *dispatcher* from API docs generation, which would eliminate the duplicate craft_cli.dispatcher.CommandGroup / craft_cli.dispatcher.BaseCommand targets and likely resolve the warnings — but this needs a maintainer to confirm by running the RTD build before closing.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":12.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":20,"confidence":55,"support_request":5},"age_days":494,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-05-06T20:35:12+00:00","updated_at":"2025-05-06T20:35:12+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":20,"support_request":5,"confidence":55,"impact":15,"quick_win":12.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":15194,"project_name":"craft-store","source":"github","external_id":"260","title":"CredentialsUnavailable error when getting credentials from SecretService","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-store/issues/260","summary":"Charmcraft store commands failed with CredentialsUnavailable because keyring lookups used the full URL https://api.charmhub.io instead of the bare host api.charmhub.io. Root cause confirmed by reporter; current code now uses urlparse().netloc for keyring host references, so the mismatch appears fixed.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The reporter (a maintainer) confirmed the root cause: the keyring lookup used the full URL 'https://api.charmhub.io' instead of the bare domain. The current codebase already uses urlparse(base_url).netloc for the keyring host in base_client.py, publisher/_publishergw.py, and login/_ubuntuone.py, so the reported mismatch is no longer reproducible in current code.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":35.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":30,"confidence":85,"support_request":0},"age_days":598,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-01-22T16:21:35+00:00","updated_at":"2025-05-01T16:43:44+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":30,"support_request":0,"confidence":85,"impact":50,"quick_win":35.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":16043,"project_name":"starbase","source":"github","external_id":"201","title":"Unified up-to-date spread file","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/starbase/issues/201","summary":"Request for a unified, up-to-date base spread file in rockcraft, filed by a maintainer to save time in charmcraft builds; only an auto-generated Jira sync comment, no labels or discussion for ~16 months.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no assignee, and no human maintainer response — the sole comment is the autogenerated Jira sync bot (CRAFT-3003), so it shows no sign of being categorised or prioritised. It is an internal infrastructure task (not a bug or support question), and while it has been inactive ~16 months, there is no evidence it was implemented or is obsolete, so closing as stale would be premature.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":40,"confidence":55,"support_request":10},"age_days":884,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-04-11T19:47:31+00:00","updated_at":"2025-04-29T16:53:21+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":55,"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":15211,"project_name":"craft-store","source":"github","external_id":"243","title":"Snap store endpoints test is flaky","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-store/issues/243","summary":"Flaky unit test test_snap_store: token expiry timestamp can be off by one second under load, causing intermittent CI failures. Unlabeled, unassigned, no maintainer response since filing ~20 months ago; only a Jira-sync bot comment.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no assignee, and the only comment is the autogenerated Jira-sync bot message (CRAFT-3800), so it shows no sign of maintainer triage despite being 628 days old. The bug itself is real and well-documented (CI failure link, exact 1-second expiry mismatch), and the fix is straightforward (freeze/mock time in the test), so it should be triaged and kept open rather than closed as stale without evidence the test was fixed.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":21.25,"staleness":75,"complexity":15,"confidence":65,"support_request":0},"age_days":640,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-12-11T23:47:05+00:00","updated_at":"2025-05-01T16:43:45+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":15,"support_request":0,"confidence":65,"impact":25,"quick_win":21.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":16293,"project_name":"starflow","source":"github","external_id":"89","title":"fix: more flair","author":"lengau","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/starflow/pull/89","summary":"Adds 22 lines of README flair (badges) to the starflow repo; single-file cosmetic change. CI fully green, zero comments, no review activity for 353 days; change still unmerged as README has no badges at HEAD.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"The PR is a trivial +22/-0 README badge change with all 24 CI checks passing, but has sat 353 days with 0 comments and 0 reviewers. The change is still applicable (README at HEAD has no badges and no commit mentions flair/badge), so it isn't irrelevant enough to close as stale — it just needs a maintainer to review and merge or dismiss.","scores":{"impact":5,"quick_win":4.75,"staleness":75,"complexity":5,"confidence":80},"age_days":365,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-09-13T01:22:06+00:00","updated_at":"2025-09-13T01:32:29+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":5,"support_request":null,"confidence":80,"impact":5,"quick_win":4.75,"has_related_links":false},{"id":22152,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"933","title":"pulling repository can hang execution indefinitely","author":"dariuszd21","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/933","summary":"Git source pull hangs indefinitely when repo is private/nonexistent because git prompts for credentials with no way to provide them. Reported Dec 2024, no maintainer response, no fix found in current code.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue was filed 627 days ago with only a bot comment creating an internal Jira ticket (CRAFT-3805) and no maintainer acknowledgement, labels, or assignee. The bug is still present in the current code: git_source.py's _clone_new and _pull_existing methods run git clone/fetch without setting GIT_TERMINAL_PROMPT=0 or equivalent, so git will prompt for credentials and hang. The fix is straightforward (disable terminal prompts in the git subprocess environment), but the issue has never been triaged by a maintainer.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":35.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":30,"confidence":70,"support_request":5},"age_days":639,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-12-12T15:41:59+00:00","updated_at":"2025-03-11T14:28:27+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":30,"support_request":5,"confidence":70,"impact":50,"quick_win":35.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":15475,"project_name":"craft-actions","source":"github","external_id":"37","title":"[Feature request] Support proper caching when packing multi-architecture charm `craft-action/pack`","author":"chanchiwai-ray","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-actions/issues/37","summary":"Feature request to include architecture in the craft-action/pack cache key so parallel multi-arch matrix builds don't collide. Unlabelled, no maintainer response; code still uses an arch-agnostic hashfiles key, so the gap persists.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is unlabelled with no maintainer response, comments, or assignee, and the referenced cache key at charmcraft/pack/action.yaml line 75 still uses only hashfiles of requirements/lock/charmcraft.yaml with no architecture component, confirming the problem persists. It needs triage to be categorised and prioritised.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":26.25,"staleness":75,"complexity":25,"confidence":75,"support_request":15},"age_days":555,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-03-07T02:31:53+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-14T20:13:06+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":25,"support_request":15,"confidence":75,"impact":35,"quick_win":26.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":21871,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1214","title":"Configure maven to ignore missing checksums for the repositories we define","author":"tigarmo","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/1214","summary":"Add checksumPolicy to the Maven settings craft-parts generates so missing checksums in the local /usr/share/maven-repo and backstage repos don't flood build output with warnings. Triaged, self-filed by a maintainer, but unimplemented and inactive for ~12 months.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue carries the 'Status: Triaged' label and was filed by maintainer tigarmo, so it has maintainer buy-in and is clearly scoped. It is still applicable: grep shows no 'checksumPolicy' anywhere in the repo and the MIRROR_REPO/CRAFT_REPO_TEMPLATE in craft_parts/utils/maven/_xml.py still lack the element, with no implementing commit found. Inactivity alone (~12 months, only a Jira-sync bot comment) is not enough to close since the maven-use area remains actively developed.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":28.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":20,"confidence":85,"support_request":0},"age_days":386,"labels":["Status: Triaged"],"created_at":"2025-08-22T17:24:58+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-22T17:25:14+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":20,"support_request":0,"confidence":85,"impact":35,"quick_win":28.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":22044,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1041","title":"Plugin integration tests should test for re-entrancy","author":"mr-cal","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/1041","summary":"Enhancement to add plugin integration tests verifying re-entrancy (running builds multiple times and detecting source updates), motivated by the uv plugin bug fixed in PR #956. Triaged by maintainer, tracked in JIRA CRAFT-4324, but no integration re-entrancy tests have been added since.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is properly triaged (Status: Triaged, Type: Enhancement labels, JIRA ticket CRAFT-4324 created) and the underlying problem is real — PR #956 'fix: make uv plugin re-entrant on code changes' was merged to address a re-entrancy bug, confirming the need for such tests. However, no integration tests for re-entrancy have been added since (only unit tests like test_get_build_commands_is_reentrant exist for cargo and maven plugins), so the enhancement remains unaddressed. The issue is stale (536 days, no activity) but still relevant as a test coverage gap.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":22.5,"staleness":75,"complexity":55,"confidence":70,"support_request":5},"age_days":548,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2025-03-13T16:14:00+00:00","updated_at":"2025-03-13T18:59:04+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":55,"support_request":5,"confidence":70,"impact":50,"quick_win":22.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":22151,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"934","title":"Rust plugin prevents from building a single package in workspace","author":"artivis","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/934","summary":"Rust plugin hardcodes --workspace in cargo build for virtual workspaces, blocking single-package builds via --package. Open ~18 months with no maintainer interaction; the hardcoded flag still exists in current code.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no assignee, and zero maintainer comments in ~18 months, showing no triage has occurred. However, close_stale is not warranted because I verified the hardcoded `cargo build --workspace` at rust_plugin.py:324 still exists in current HEAD, so the reported limitation remains real and actionable. The fix is modest (drop or condition the flag per cargo's default-members semantics) but touches workspace build behavior and binary installation, warranting maintainer assessment.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":24.75,"staleness":75,"complexity":45,"confidence":80,"support_request":10},"age_days":639,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-12-12T16:06:43+00:00","updated_at":"2025-03-11T14:28:44+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":45,"support_request":10,"confidence":80,"impact":45,"quick_win":24.75,"has_related_links":false},{"id":2285,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"1844","title":"Add appropriate ignored packages for stage-packages","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/1844","summary":"Feature request to exclude preinstalled OS packages from stage-packages to prevent staging down to glibc. Resolved by merged PR #1875 but issue remains open. Inactive for over a year.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"PR #1875 was merged to add ignored packages for stage-packages, explicitly stated as resolving issue #1844. The feature was implemented across six modified files covering current Ubuntu bases, making the issue no longer relevant. The issue should be closed as resolved.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":24.75,"staleness":75,"complexity":45,"confidence":75,"support_request":10},"age_days":747,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-08-26T14:49:05+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:18:01+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":45,"support_request":10,"confidence":75,"impact":45,"quick_win":24.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":2287,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"1842","title":"Output build times for each pip package built","author":"sed-i","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/1842","summary":"Feature request to output per-package build times during charmcraft pack, since --no-binary builds can be very slow. Open 737 days with no labels, no comments, and no maintainer response. The --no-binary behavior is still active in the codebase.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, zero comments, and no maintainer interaction in 737 days, showing no sign of triage. However, the underlying problem remains relevant: charm_builder.py and the poetry plugin still use --no-binary=:all: (confirmed in current code), so per-package build timing would still help diagnose slow builds. It should be assessed and either scoped or deferred, not closed as stale.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":21.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":40,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":750,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-08-24T02:59:42+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:17:51+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":35,"quick_win":21.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":2693,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"1435","title":"`charmcraft release` doesn't use output text from the store.","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/1435","summary":"charmcraft release command echoes user-provided resource revisions instead of the store's actual response, so output can be misleading (e.g. shows r42 attached while store attached r41). No maintainer response or labels; code path unchanged since the issue was filed.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is a real bug: ReleaseCommand.run() in charmcraft/application/commands/store.py still builds its output message from parsed_args.resource rather than the store's release response, and Store.release() in charmcraft/store/store.py returns the store's JSON but the command ignores it. No labels, no maintainer comments, no assignee, and no linked PR addressing it, so it has not been triaged. The bug is still present in current code, so it should not be closed as stale or not-a-bug.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":21.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":30,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":1006,"labels":[],"created_at":"2023-12-11T20:22:21+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:18:17+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":30,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":30,"quick_win":21.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":4520,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"1155","title":"feat: add support for amd64v3 platform","author":"cjdcordeiro","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/pull/1155","summary":"Adds amd64v3 to supported architectures in rockcraft. 160 days old, no comments, no reviews, one CI check failing (Fast tests noble amd64). Author is a maintainer who framed it as a conversation starter.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"The PR is 160 days old with zero comments and zero reviews, but the author is a maintainer who explicitly framed it as a conversation starter/feature request. The change is small (+3/-0) and the feature (amd64v3) is not yet present in the codebase. The failing CI check (Fast tests noble amd64) needs investigation, and the PR itself notes it may require additional validation across craft components. A maintainer should review whether the scope is sufficient or if broader changes are needed before merging.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":28.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":30,"confidence":55},"age_days":172,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-03-24T14:30:33+00:00","updated_at":"2026-03-24T14:30:34+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":30,"support_request":null,"confidence":55,"impact":40,"quick_win":28.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":4793,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"882","title":"fastapi-framework extension cannot detect 'prime' entry from rockcraft.yaml","author":"lego37yoon","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/882","summary":"fastapi-framework extension rejects a rockcraft.yaml whose prime list contains entries not prefixed with app/ (.env, gemini_api). Maintainer explained the app/ prefix requirement and asked the reporter to verify a corrected config; no reply since 2025-05-30.","suggested_action":"close_not_a_bug","suggested_action_reason":"The error is working as intended: rockcraft/extensions/fastapi.py:193 enforces that every prime entry in fastapi-framework/install-app starts with app/ (IMAGE_BASE_DIR = \"app\"), and the reporter's list includes .env and gemini_api without that prefix. Maintainer javierdelapuente already explained the fix (prefix all entries with app/) on 2025-05-30 and asked the reporter to confirm; with no response for ~6 months, this is a usage question resolved through configuration, not a bug.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":17.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":15,"confidence":80,"support_request":85},"age_days":490,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-05-11T08:01:41+00:00","updated_at":"2025-05-30T15:39:45+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":15,"support_request":85,"confidence":80,"impact":20,"quick_win":17.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":4835,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"840","title":"Graphs in Chisel Documentation not very readable in dark mode","author":"marcusboden","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/840","summary":"Chisel docs SVG with black arrows on transparent background unreadable in dark mode; the image has since been removed from the documentation (PR #1267), making the issue no longer applicable.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The problematic SVG (package-slices.svg) is no longer referenced in docs/explanation/chisel.rst — the file now contains only text. Commit 888acff0 (PR #1267, 'docs: remove Chisel-related duplicated content') removed the image from the page, so the reported dark-mode readability problem is no longer reproducible. The orphaned SVG file remains in docs/_static/ but is unused.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":13.5,"staleness":75,"complexity":10,"confidence":80,"support_request":5},"age_days":542,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-03-20T07:38:13+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:12:50+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":10,"support_request":5,"confidence":80,"impact":15,"quick_win":13.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":5331,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"344","title":"\"failed to run apt update\" when using a specific package-repository with 20.04 base","author":"tigarmo","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/344","summary":"apt update fails in the overlay step with a certificate-verification error when an HTTPS package-repository is used with the ubuntu:20.04 base; http or a 22.04 base works. Open since Aug 2023, no labels, no maintainer response, inactive ~13 months.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer acknowledgement in ~3 years (last activity 381 days ago), so it has never been triaged. It is a genuine, well-reproduced bug (log shows 'Certificate verification failed' during chrooted apt-get update, while wget from the same 20.04 image works), and the overlay/package-repositories mechanism still exists in the codebase, so it cannot be closed as stale or irrelevant without first checking whether current versions still reproduce it.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":55,"confidence":65,"support_request":10},"age_days":1125,"labels":[],"created_at":"2023-08-14T13:22:04+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:12:44+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":55,"support_request":10,"confidence":65,"impact":40,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":5216,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"459","title":"Add support for pinning the build and build-base images","author":"arturo-seijas","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/459","summary":"Feature request to pin build and build-base images by digest in rockcraft descriptors for repeatable builds and renovate-driven updates. Open 951 days, no labels, zero maintainer comments, no assignee. Code confirms base types are still Literal strings with no digest support.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no maintainer comments, and no assignee after 951 days. Code inspection confirms BaseT and BuildBaseT in project.py are still Literal types (e.g. 'ubuntu@24.04') with no digest-pinning support, and RockcraftImageService fetches bases by name only. The feature remains unimplemented and relevant, so it needs a maintainer to triage and decide whether to scope it.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":20.25,"staleness":75,"complexity":55,"confidence":75,"support_request":10},"age_days":963,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-01-23T17:14:55+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:12:49+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":55,"support_request":10,"confidence":75,"impact":45,"quick_win":20.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":5537,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"137","title":"Priming files into /lib breaks system binaries in the final image","author":"tigarmo","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/137","summary":"Priming files into /lib (a symlink to /usr/lib in Ubuntu 22.04) breaks the symlink in the final image, causing system binaries to fail. Multiple usrmerge-related PRs have since been merged addressing symlink handling in layers.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue was filed in Nov 2022 and has had no activity since. Multiple subsequent PRs have addressed the underlying usrmerge symlink problem: #154 (handle symlinks in base layer), #163 (opaque whiteouts), #200 (subdirs in usrmerge), #211 (symlink subdirs), #417 (prune primed files), and #498 (remove usrmerge-breaking symlinks). The current codebase has a full usrmerge implementation with documentation (docs/explanation/usrmerge.rst) and the problem described in this issue appears to have been resolved through these changes.","scores":{"impact":80,"quick_win":24.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":70,"confidence":72,"support_request":5},"age_days":1409,"labels":[],"created_at":"2022-11-03T13:38:05+00:00","updated_at":"2022-11-18T20:48:37+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":70,"support_request":5,"confidence":72,"impact":80,"quick_win":24.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":13153,"project_name":"craft-archives","source":"github","external_id":"141","title":"No longer works on macOS","author":"Saviq","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-archives/issues/141","summary":"Snapcraft 8.5.0 via Homebrew fails on macOS: craft-archives unconditionally imports python-debian, which the brew formula only installs on Linux. Discussion ended ~20 months ago with the maintainer questioning whether it's a bug in this repo at all.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The thread stalled 20 months ago after the maintainer (tigarmo) questioned whether it's a bug in craft-archives at all, suggesting the fix belongs in the external homebrew formula, and the reporter never provided the requested venv reproduction. The affected version (snapcraft 8.5.0, Dec 2024) is long superseded, and the unresolved design question (lazy/optional debian import) can be re-filed against current code if still reproducible. Confidence is moderate because repo tools were unavailable, so I could not verify whether craft-archives still imports debian unconditionally today.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":16.5,"staleness":75,"complexity":45,"confidence":55,"support_request":10},"age_days":645,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-12-06T15:59:33+00:00","updated_at":"2024-12-09T09:12:44+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":45,"support_request":10,"confidence":55,"impact":30,"quick_win":16.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":5274,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"401","title":"where does the python3 symlink come from? ","author":"cjdcordeiro","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/401","summary":"Question about why the python3 symlink appears when installing the python3.8-venv stage package but not python3.8 alone. Open since ~2022 with no maintainer response or labels; a later spread test documents the symlink as expected behavior from a python3.8-venv dependency.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is a maintainer's own open question (no labels, no comments, no assignee) with no resolution recorded, so it has not been triaged. However, a later spread test (tests/spread/rockcraft/plugin-python3-less) explicitly documents that the python3 symlink is 'brought in by a python3.8-venv dependency', suggesting the behavior is understood and expected, which may make this a candidate for close_not_a_bug once a maintainer confirms.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":40,"confidence":60,"support_request":55},"age_days":1045,"labels":[],"created_at":"2023-11-03T09:22:44+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:12:42+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":40,"support_request":55,"confidence":60,"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":22037,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1048","title":"docs: Add reference on partition/overlay env vars","author":"upils","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/pull/1048","summary":"Adds documentation for partition/overlay environment variables. Approved by 1 reviewer with 1 unresolved comment. CI has failing lint and java-plugin tests. Copilot recently resolved merge conflicts.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"The PR has 1 approval but 1 unresolved review comment and failing CI checks (lint / files, test-java-plugins). Copilot recently resolved merge conflicts, suggesting it's still relevant, but maintainer review is needed to address the unresolved comment and CI failures before merging.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":10,"confidence":70},"age_days":542,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-03-20T09:59:31+00:00","updated_at":"2026-09-02T15:06:33+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":10,"support_request":null,"confidence":70,"impact":20,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":39799,"project_name":"craft-providers","source":"github","external_id":"703","title":"Allow pointing to daily or release buildd images for LXD","author":"mr-cal","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-providers/issues/703","summary":"Enhancement request to add runtime configuration for switching between daily and release buildd images in LXD. No maintainer response or assignee yet.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue requests a runtime configuration option to switch between daily and release buildd images. While both remotes are defined in the code, no configuration mechanism exists. The issue has the 'Type: Enhancement' label but no maintainer response, no assignee, and only an automated Jira sync comment from 136 days ago. It needs triage to determine relevance and implementation approach.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":40,"confidence":60,"support_request":10},"age_days":681,"labels":["Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2024-10-31T16:15:01+00:00","updated_at":"2026-04-22T02:48:38+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":60,"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":39825,"project_name":"craft-providers","source":"github","external_id":"454","title":"Using default compatibility tag can cause DNS name conflicts","author":"mr-cal","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-providers/issues/454","summary":"Bug: missing compatibility_tag causes LXD DNS name conflicts when launching instances for multiple projects. Open for ~3 years with no maintainer comments or assignee.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no maintainer comments, no assignee, and only the initial 'Type: Bug' label, indicating it hasn't been properly triaged or prioritized despite being open for nearly 3 years. The referenced related issue (craft-application#139) was closed without resolution, suggesting this needs fresh assessment to determine if the bug still exists and whether the suggested warning or architectural fix is appropriate.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":35.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":30,"confidence":60,"support_request":10},"age_days":1037,"labels":["Type: Bug"],"created_at":"2023-11-10T12:42:39+00:00","updated_at":"2026-04-22T02:47:54+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":30,"support_request":10,"confidence":60,"impact":50,"quick_win":35.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":39850,"project_name":"craft-providers","source":"github","external_id":"828","title":"Allow getting the apt proxy from the user's apt settings","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-providers/issues/828","summary":"Enhancement to use user's apt proxy settings in craft-providers. Open 353 days with no maintainer comments or activity.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"This enhancement request from maintainer lengau has had zero maintainer comments or activity for 353 days. While the feature is legitimate (enabling apt proxy support for corporate networks), no maintainer has acknowledged, prioritized, or responded to it. The codebase already has snapd proxy setup (base.py:_setup_snapd_proxy) but no apt proxy handling, confirming this is unimplemented.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":24.75,"staleness":75,"complexity":45,"confidence":65,"support_request":15},"age_days":361,"labels":["Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2025-09-16T18:36:13+00:00","updated_at":"2025-09-16T18:36:29+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":45,"support_request":15,"confidence":65,"impact":45,"quick_win":24.75,"has_related_links":false},{"id":41228,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1648","title":"[WIP] ci: skip tests on documentation-only PRs","author":"Copilot","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/pull/1648","summary":"Empty WIP test PR with 0 changes, created to verify CI filtering for docs-only PRs (#1647). Inactive 51 days with failing CI checks.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"This PR has 0 files changed and has been inactive for 51 days. It was created as a WIP test to verify CI filtering for #1647, but with no actual changes and no maintainer engagement, it is no longer applicable. The main PR (#1647) remains open, so this test PR is not needed.","scores":{"impact":5,"quick_win":4.5,"staleness":75,"complexity":10,"confidence":65},"age_days":59,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-07-15T21:38:00+00:00","updated_at":"2026-07-15T21:38:53+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":10,"support_request":null,"confidence":65,"impact":5,"quick_win":4.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":6666,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"5213","title":"fix(project): Use an annotated type for duration strings","author":"lengau","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/pull/5213","summary":"PR introduces an annotated type for duration strings with stricter regex validation, inspired by snapcraft PR #5210 (ReDoS fix). Has 1 approval but 4 unresolved review comments and has been open for 596 days.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"The PR has 4 unresolved review comments and has been open for 596 days. A maintainer should address the unresolved feedback and decide whether to merge, request further changes, or close the PR. The type safety improvement remains valid but stalled due to unaddressed review comments.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":26.25,"staleness":75,"complexity":25,"confidence":65},"age_days":599,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-01-21T23:23:33+00:00","updated_at":"2026-09-09T13:48:28+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":25,"support_request":null,"confidence":65,"impact":35,"quick_win":26.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":46464,"project_name":"fetch-service","source":"github","external_id":"495","title":"Linters: enable gocyclo, errcheck and gosec","author":"upils","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/fetch-service/issues/495","summary":"Enable gocyclo, errcheck, and gosec linters in golangci-lint config and fix resulting errors. Triaged but inactive for ~9 months.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is labeled 'Triaged' and authored by a maintainer (upils), indicating it was acknowledged as valid. However, it has been inactive for 277 days with only an auto-generated Jira ticket comment. It should remain open as a legitimate enhancement but may need re-prioritization or a maintainer to pick it up.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":15.75,"staleness":75,"complexity":55,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":319,"labels":["Type: Enhancement","Status: Triaged"],"created_at":"2025-10-28T17:00:39+00:00","updated_at":"2025-12-06T05:04:50+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":55,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":35,"quick_win":15.75,"has_related_links":false},{"id":1899,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2233","title":"charmcraft should complain if the charm contains a bundle","author":"PietroPasotti","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/2233","summary":"Request for charmcraft pack to warn or fail when a charm root contains a bundle.yaml, since juju then deploys the bundle instead of the charm. No labels, no maintainer response; validation still absent from current pack code.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer acknowledgement in 524 days, so it has never been triaged. It is not a candidate for close_stale because the requested validation is still missing: PackCommand in charmcraft/application/commands/lifecycle.py contains no bundle.yaml check, and the only bundle.yaml handling in the repo is in store.py's get_name_from_zip for uploads. The fix itself is small (a check in the pack path), so it needs a maintainer decision on warning vs. erroring rather than closure.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":26.25,"staleness":75,"complexity":25,"confidence":80,"support_request":10},"age_days":536,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-03-25T10:08:19+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:17:54+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":25,"support_request":10,"confidence":80,"impact":35,"quick_win":26.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":39781,"project_name":"craft-providers","source":"github","external_id":"383","title":"bumping the compatibility tag should be more robust","author":"mr-cal","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-providers/issues/383","summary":"Enhancement to avoid hardcoding compatibility tags in tests by referencing them from a single source. Open for 3 years with no maintainer comments.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"This 3-year-old enhancement request about test refactoring has received no maintainer engagement (0 comments) and the project has evolved through multiple compatibility tag versions (v3 to v8) since it was opened. The specific PR discussion referenced in the issue body is likely no longer applicable to the current codebase.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":22.5,"staleness":75,"complexity":25,"confidence":65,"support_request":10},"age_days":1122,"labels":["Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2023-08-17T19:25:52+00:00","updated_at":"2026-04-22T02:50:12+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":25,"support_request":10,"confidence":65,"impact":30,"quick_win":22.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":21508,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1581","title":"feat: deprecate OsRelease in favor of distro","author":"lengau","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/pull/1581","summary":"Deprecates the OsRelease utility in favor of the distro package across 18 files to avoid a major version bump. Closed and superseded by PR #1581, which carries the same changes and remains open.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The tracker records this PR as closed and 'superseded by pull request #1581', which is open with the identical title and same 18-file change set, so this PR is no longer the applicable vehicle for the change. It also shows 97 days without activity, 0 comments, 3 unresolved review comments, and 19 failing CI jobs (including OSV-scanner and minimum-dependency tests).","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":22.5,"staleness":75,"complexity":50,"confidence":85},"age_days":124,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-05-12T08:04:28+00:00","updated_at":"2026-05-26T19:04:00+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":50,"support_request":null,"confidence":85,"impact":45,"quick_win":22.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":21834,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1251","title":"scons plugin: Support `disable-parallel` parameter","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/1251","summary":"Request to add the disable-parallel part property to the scons plugin. Labeled 'Needs information' by the maintainer, who called it extremely low priority until a real-world use case is provided; no use case or activity in ~12 months.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The maintainer (author lengau) explicitly stated this is 'extremely low priority until someone shows us a real-world use case' and labeled it 'Status: Needs information', but 363 days have passed with zero comments and no use case provided, exceeding the 6-month window for unfulfilled maintainer requests. The feature remains unimplemented in scons_plugin.py, so it isn't obsolete, but the blocking input has never arrived.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":12.75,"staleness":75,"complexity":15,"confidence":75,"support_request":5},"age_days":375,"labels":["Type: Enhancement","Status: Needs information"],"created_at":"2025-09-02T15:27:33+00:00","updated_at":"2025-09-02T15:27:33+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":15,"support_request":5,"confidence":75,"impact":15,"quick_win":12.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":21844,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1241","title":"jlink plugin: Support `disable-parallel` parameter","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/1241","summary":"Request to support the disable-parallel part property in the jlink plugin. Maintainer labeled it 'Needs information' and called it extremely low priority without a real-world use case; no activity for ~12 months, still unimplemented.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is labeled 'Status: Needs information' and the author (a maintainer) explicitly stated it is 'extremely low priority until someone shows us a real-world use case'; 363 days have passed with 0 comments and no use case provided, exceeding the 6-month window for waiting on requested details. Additionally, the jlink plugin's build commands (jlink/jdeps) don't parallelize, so the property's semantics are unclear without a concrete use case.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":11.25,"staleness":75,"complexity":25,"confidence":80,"support_request":0},"age_days":375,"labels":["Type: Enhancement","Status: Needs information"],"created_at":"2025-09-02T15:25:18+00:00","updated_at":"2025-09-02T15:25:18+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":25,"support_request":0,"confidence":80,"impact":15,"quick_win":11.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":21845,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1240","title":"java plugin: Support `disable-parallel` parameter","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/1240","summary":"Enhancement request to add the disable-parallel part property to the Java base plugin (shared by ant, gradle, maven, maven-use). Labeled Needs information; maintainer awaits a real-world use case, no activity for 363 days.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The maintainer (issue author) explicitly requested a real-world use case and labeled it 'Status: Needs information', calling it 'extremely low priority' until one is provided; 363 days have passed with zero comments and no use case, exceeding the 6-month window for waiting on requested details. Code confirms only the autotools plugin implements disable-parallel, so the feature is still missing but unvalidated by any real-world need.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":8.25,"staleness":75,"complexity":45,"confidence":65,"support_request":5},"age_days":375,"labels":["Type: Enhancement","Status: Needs information"],"created_at":"2025-09-02T15:25:07+00:00","updated_at":"2025-09-02T15:25:07+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":45,"support_request":5,"confidence":65,"impact":15,"quick_win":8.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":39770,"project_name":"craft-providers","source":"github","external_id":"583","title":"Documentation for network connectivity","author":"mr-cal","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-providers/issues/583","summary":"Documentation request to help users debug LXD and Multipass network connectivity issues. Open 806 days with minimal maintainer engagement.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"This is a well-scoped documentation task created by a maintainer (mr-cal) with clear requirements: document how to launch LXD/Multipass outside the craft app and how to troubleshoot network connectivity. The problem (users misdiagnosing LXD/Multipass issues as craft-app bugs) likely still exists, as evidenced by the `craft_providers/base.py` networking setup code. However, the issue has seen no real engagement beyond an auto-generated Jira sync comment after 806 days.","scores":{"impact":65,"quick_win":42.25,"staleness":75,"complexity":35,"confidence":65,"support_request":15},"age_days":814,"labels":["Type: Documentation"],"created_at":"2024-06-20T14:14:19+00:00","updated_at":"2026-04-22T02:50:25+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":35,"support_request":15,"confidence":65,"impact":65,"quick_win":42.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":39805,"project_name":"craft-providers","source":"github","external_id":"766","title":"Switch centos and almalinux containers to use images.lxd.canonical.com","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-providers/issues/766","summary":"Enhancement to switch CentOS and AlmaLinux LXD container image URLs from images.linuxcontainers.org to images.lxd.canonical.com. Open 431 days with no comments.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"This is a valid, clearly scoped enhancement from maintainer lengau to switch two URL constants (lines 186 and 192 of craft_providers/lxd/remotes.py) from images.linuxcontainers.org to images.lxd.canonical.com. The change is straightforward but has sat for 431 days with no comments or assignee. It remains a valid improvement that should stay open for someone to pick up.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":45.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":10,"confidence":70,"support_request":0},"age_days":439,"labels":["Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2025-06-30T20:08:58+00:00","updated_at":"2026-04-22T02:48:32+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":10,"support_request":0,"confidence":70,"impact":50,"quick_win":45.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":39808,"project_name":"craft-providers","source":"github","external_id":"880","title":"Support LXD backend on non-Linux hosts","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-providers/issues/880","summary":"Enhancement request to support LXD backend on non-Linux hosts via remote LXD connections. Untriaged, no maintainer response after 263 days.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"This is a well-structured enhancement request with clear motivation (lighter weight than multipass VM). The issue has no maintainer response, labels beyond 'Type: Enhancement', or assignee after 263 days. Current code in installer.py explicitly blocks non-Linux platforms with 'unsupported platform' errors, and pylxd.Client() defaults to local Unix socket connections. This would require architectural changes to support remote LXD authentication and connections.","scores":{"impact":60,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":70,"confidence":65,"support_request":10},"age_days":271,"labels":["Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2025-12-16T00:53:53+00:00","updated_at":"2026-04-22T02:48:28+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":70,"support_request":10,"confidence":65,"impact":60,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":2138,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"1991","title":"Better error message for unsupported 24.04 base","author":"yanksyoon","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/1991","summary":"Request to improve the cryptic 'base requires platforms definition' error when using the deprecated bases model with 24.04. No maintainer response, no labels, 0 comments. The bases model is deprecated in favor of platforms.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"No labels, no maintainer comments, 0 responses in 655 days. The bases model is deprecated (docs confirm 'bases is deprecated, replaced by base, build-base, and platforms'), so this is a low-priority UX improvement for a deprecated code path. Needs triage to decide whether to address or close as the feature is being phased out.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":20.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":20,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":668,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-11-14T09:08:47+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:17:41+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":20,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":25,"quick_win":20.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":2200,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"1929","title":"Docs: Harmonize README with template","author":"medubelko","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/1929","summary":"Task to harmonize craft project READMEs with the starbase template. Dependency starbase#233 is closed, and charmcraft's README was aligned with the model in PR #2283, but the issue remains open with no maintainer activity since 2024-09.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is inactive for ~13 months (last activity was an autogenerated Jira-sync bot comment on 2024-09-28) and the underlying work appears complete: its dependency canonical/starbase#233 is closed, the sibling rockcraft#668 was closed as fixed via PR #881, and charmcraft's README was aligned with the model in commit 12308dde (PR #2283) with the current README matching the standard craft template structure. No further action is pending on this issue.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":14.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":30,"confidence":65,"support_request":0},"age_days":715,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-09-28T01:08:35+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:17:57+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":30,"support_request":0,"confidence":65,"impact":20,"quick_win":14.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":2236,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"1893","title":"Alma Linux builds are broken due to base issues","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/1893","summary":"Downstream tracking bug for craft-application#455 (strict base detection for non-Ubuntu bases breaking AlmaLinux builds). Upstream issue was closed/deferred to Jira CRAFT-3374. No labels, no maintainer engagement beyond bot, inactive 381 days.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The upstream issue craft-application#455 was closed and deferred to internal Jira CRAFT-3374 with no fix merged, yet almalinux@9 remains in SUPPORTED_BASE_STRINGS in charmcraft/const.py. The issue has no labels, no maintainer response (only the Jira-sync bot), and has been inactive for 381 days. A maintainer should decide whether to close this as superseded by the Jira ticket or keep it open as the underlying base-detection problem may still affect AlmaLinux users.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":20.25,"staleness":75,"complexity":55,"confidence":70,"support_request":5},"age_days":731,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-09-11T14:46:28+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:18:12+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":55,"support_request":5,"confidence":70,"impact":45,"quick_win":20.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":2286,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"1843","title":"Add charmcraft-specific versions of upstream python plugins","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/1843","summary":"Feature request to add charmcraft-specific versions of upstream craft-parts python plugins. Implemented via PR #1899 (Python and Poetry plugins) with docs in #1940 and a uv plugin in #2050. No further action needed.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The requested feature has been implemented: commit 8b748f3e (PR #1899) added charmcraft-specific Python and Poetry plugins under charmcraft/parts/plugins/, with docs added in #1940 and integration/unit tests present. The issue is 735 days old with no maintainer interaction beyond the Jira sync bot, and the feature is fully realized in the codebase.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":20.25,"staleness":75,"complexity":55,"confidence":85,"support_request":0},"age_days":747,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-08-26T14:37:51+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:18:01+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":55,"support_request":0,"confidence":85,"impact":45,"quick_win":20.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":2670,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"1458","title":"Feature request: remove build base version from cache folder","author":"carlcsaposs-canonical","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/1458","summary":"Feature request to drop the build-base version from the shared cache folder name so pip wheels are reused across base version bumps. Open, unlabeled, one author comment referencing #1457; no maintainer response.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"No labels, no assignee, and no maintainer comments — only the author's own note 'Similar to #1457' — so the issue has never been triaged. The referenced cache layout (base-version-prefixed pip cache) still exists in craft-providers/base.py _mount_shared_cache_dirs, so it is not obsolete, but it is a niche optimization with no maintainer buy-in yet.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":16.5,"staleness":75,"complexity":45,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":983,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-01-03T16:38:32+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:18:14+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":45,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":30,"quick_win":16.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":2671,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"1457","title":"Feature request: use Ubuntu version instead of series in cache folder","author":"carlcsaposs-canonical","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/1457","summary":"Feature request to use Ubuntu version (e.g. 22.04) instead of series name (e.g. JAMMY) in the charmcraft cache folder path, simplifying cache interaction. No maintainer response, no labels, no activity in ~13 months.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer interaction in 971 days. The referenced cache path pattern (BuilddBaseAlias.JAMMY) does not appear in the current charmcraft codebase — the cache directory logic lives in craft-parts/craft-providers (BaseDirectory.save_cache_path), making it unclear whether this is still the relevant code path. The request is a minor convenience improvement, not a bug, but it has not been assessed by any maintainer.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":14.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":30,"confidence":55,"support_request":10},"age_days":983,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-01-03T16:35:57+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:18:15+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":30,"support_request":10,"confidence":55,"impact":20,"quick_win":14.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":2696,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"1432","title":"Ineffective Output Filtering Using 'charmcraft help --all | grep revision' Command","author":"mateofloreza","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/1432","summary":"charmcraft help --all output goes to stderr, so piping to grep shows nothing. Maintainer logged it upstream in craft-cli#273, which was closed without a fix; no local change made.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer lengau triaged this on 2024-09-09 and logged it upstream in canonical/craft-cli#273, confirming the help text is emitted to stderr by the shared craft-cli dispatcher rather than charmcraft itself. The upstream issue was closed without a fix, so the behavior likely persists, but the issue is a valid, acknowledged bug with a clear root cause and a workaround (2>&1), so it should remain open pending an upstream decision.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":15.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":40,"confidence":70,"support_request":25},"age_days":1006,"labels":[],"created_at":"2023-12-11T11:17:45+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:18:18+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":40,"support_request":25,"confidence":70,"impact":25,"quick_win":15.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":4639,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"1036","title":"Allow grammar for `package-repositories`","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/1036","summary":"Feature request to allow architecture-conditional URLs in package-repositories (e.g. amd64 vs arm64) so deb-src builds work across architectures. Open 283 days, no labels, no comments, no maintainer response.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is a well-scoped feature request filed by a maintainer (lengau) with a clear use case (cross-arch deb-src builds), but it has no labels, no comments, and no maintainer acknowledgement in 283 days. It requires schema and model changes to support conditional URL values, which is a non-trivial design decision. It needs triage to determine whether the maintainers want to pursue this or if an alternative (e.g. separate build profiles per arch) is preferred.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":16.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":60,"confidence":55,"support_request":10},"age_days":295,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-11-21T20:27:21+00:00","updated_at":"2025-11-21T20:27:21+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":60,"support_request":10,"confidence":55,"impact":40,"quick_win":16.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":15894,"project_name":"starbase","source":"github","external_id":"351","title":"feat: add a default snapcraft.yaml","author":"upils","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/starbase/pull/351","summary":"Adds a default snapcraft.yaml (+54 lines, 1 file) so users can build a snap via the craft-application flow. Approved by 1 reviewer but 8 review comments remain unresolved; last activity 462 days ago.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"The PR is approved but has 8 unresolved review comments and no CI checks ran, so it is not ready to land. Last activity was 462 days ago with the author deferring to @tigarmo and @mr-cal for input; @mr-cal removed their review request after commenting, leaving the thread open. A maintainer should resolve the outstanding threads before merging.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":24.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":20,"confidence":55},"age_days":577,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-02-12T10:36:20+00:00","updated_at":"2025-05-26T13:55:46+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":20,"support_request":null,"confidence":55,"impact":30,"quick_win":24.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":15905,"project_name":"starbase","source":"github","external_id":"340","title":"Makefile/CI: Unfold groups if they failed","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/starbase/issues/340","summary":"CI/Makefile improvement: failed log groups should be unfolded in CI output for easier debugging. Self-filed by a maintainer, no labels or comments, blocked by a GitHub feature request (community discussion 39411); inactive ~19 months.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The maintainer (lengau) self-filed this as a tracking issue and explicitly marked it 'Blocked by https://github.com/orgs/community/discussions/39411', an external GitHub feature request for auto-unfolding failed groups. Since the external dependency is still unresolved, the issue remains valid and applicable rather than stale-irrelevant, so it should stay open. Confidence is moderate because repo inspection was unavailable (no pinned SHA) and there is no other activity to corroborate.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":14.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":30,"confidence":60,"support_request":0},"age_days":590,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-01-30T18:48:44+00:00","updated_at":"2025-01-30T18:48:44+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":30,"support_request":0,"confidence":60,"impact":20,"quick_win":14.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":40774,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2775","title":"ci: add concurrency cancellation across GitHub workflows","author":"lengau","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/pull/2775","summary":"Adds top-level workflow concurrency groups with cancel-in-progress to GitHub workflows. Inactive for 52 days with no reviewer engagement.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The PR has been inactive for 52 days with zero reviewer engagement and no comments. It is a simple CI configuration change (+40/-0 lines across 10 workflow files) that adds concurrency cancellation groups. No evidence of maintainer interest or active review, and the change can be re-submitted if still desired.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":10,"confidence":70},"age_days":64,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-07-11T01:20:40+00:00","updated_at":"2026-07-14T20:16:21+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":10,"support_request":null,"confidence":70,"impact":20,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":40775,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2774","title":"test: speed up spread test runtime by removing redundant package setup","author":"lengau","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/pull/2774","summary":"Optimizes spread test runtime by consolidating package installs and removing redundant apt updates across 11 test files","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The PR has been inactive for 52 days with no reviewer engagement or maintainer feedback despite being opened by a maintainer. While the test optimization is valid, the prolonged silence and lack of review activity suggest it's no longer a priority. The changes are straightforward and could be re-submitted if needed.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":17.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":15,"confidence":70},"age_days":64,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-07-11T01:14:39+00:00","updated_at":"2026-07-14T20:26:33+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":15,"support_request":null,"confidence":70,"impact":20,"quick_win":17.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":4786,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"889","title":"uv plugin rewrites non-python shebangs","author":"mr-cal","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/889","summary":"uv plugin rewrites shebangs on all executable files (including non-Python shell scripts from stage packages), breaking dpkg maintainer scripts. Bug still present in code; no maintainer response or labels in 460 days.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no comments, and no maintainer interaction in 460 days. The bug is confirmed still present: uv_plugin.py _get_rewrite_shebangs_commands() uses find -type f -executable to rewrite shebangs on ALL executables, not just Python scripts. The uv plugin is now restricted to v1 bases (20.04/22.04/24.04) per get_python_plugins(), but the underlying bug remains unfixed for those bases.","scores":{"impact":55,"quick_win":33.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":40,"confidence":70,"support_request":5},"age_days":472,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-05-28T16:29:54+00:00","updated_at":"2025-05-28T16:29:54+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":40,"support_request":5,"confidence":70,"impact":55,"quick_win":33.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":15605,"project_name":"snapcraft-rocks","source":"github","external_id":"105","title":"chore(deps): update dependency canonical/snapcraft to v8.14.5 (core24-8)","author":"renovate","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft-rocks/pull/105","summary":"Renovate PR updating canonical/snapcraft from v8.11.1 to v8.14.5. Small 1-file change with failing CI on self-hosted build-rock runners. No reviewers assigned.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"This is an automated Renovate dependency update with only 1 file changed (+1/-1 lines). The PR has failing CI checks on self-hosted build-rock runners (amd64 and arm64), and no reviewers have been assigned. Since this is a routine dependency bump that can be regenerated by Renovate, and the CI failures suggest infrastructure issues rather than code problems, closing and letting the bot create a fresh PR is the appropriate action.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":14.25,"staleness":75,"complexity":5,"confidence":85},"age_days":360,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-09-17T16:15:23+00:00","updated_at":"2026-09-07T16:13:47+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":5,"support_request":null,"confidence":85,"impact":15,"quick_win":14.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":15316,"project_name":"craft-store","source":"github","external_id":"138","title":"Endpoint for list_upload_reviews","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-store/issues/138","summary":"Feature request to add a list_upload_reviews client method to craft-store's base client. Open ~2.7 years, unlabelled, no comments; method still unimplemented and integration tests still use a raw-request workaround that references this issue.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is unlabelled, unassigned, and has zero comments, showing no sign of categorisation or prioritisation despite being filed by a maintainer. It remains valid and not stale: no list_upload_reviews method exists in craft_store/base_client.py, and tests/integration/charmhub/test_charmhub_workflow.py:73 still carries a TODO pointing at this issue, so it should be triaged and scheduled rather than closed.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":26.25,"staleness":75,"complexity":25,"confidence":85,"support_request":0},"age_days":1009,"labels":[],"created_at":"2023-12-08T19:44:12+00:00","updated_at":"2024-01-02T18:43:30+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":25,"support_request":0,"confidence":85,"impact":35,"quick_win":26.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":39860,"project_name":"craft-providers","source":"github","external_id":"789","title":"Checking the compatibility tag should be more robust","author":"bepri","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-providers/issues/789","summary":"Enhancement to raise an error when compatibility tag is missing instead of assuming compatibility. Open for ~1 year with no maintainer comments or action.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has been open for ~1 year with 0 maintainer comments, no assignee, and no labels beyond the initial Type: Enhancement. The code at craft_providers/base.py:193-204 still contains the behavior described (assuming compatibility when config.compatibility_tag is None). Without maintainer engagement or discussion about whether this should be an error or warning, it needs triage to determine priority and scope.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":28.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":30,"confidence":65,"support_request":10},"age_days":397,"labels":["Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2025-08-11T23:00:18+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-22T21:58:49+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":30,"support_request":10,"confidence":65,"impact":40,"quick_win":28.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":12649,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"424","title":"Surface deprecation warnings when loading the project model","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/issues/424","summary":"Feature request to surface pydantic deprecation warnings when loading the project model, enabling clean field deprecation without workarounds. Unlabelled, no comments, inactive for 15 months.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is unlabelled, has zero comments, no assignee, and no maintainer response despite being 745 days old with last activity 465 days ago. Although filed by maintainer lengau as a planned task, it shows no sign of formal triage (no labels, priority, or categorization). The referenced workaround (charmcraft PR #1828) confirms the motivation is still relevant.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":21.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":40,"confidence":70,"support_request":5},"age_days":757,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-08-16T22:14:36+00:00","updated_at":"2025-05-23T17:26:46+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":40,"support_request":5,"confidence":70,"impact":35,"quick_win":21.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":4822,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"853","title":"docs: add new \"how-to\" guide for inspecting rocks with dive","author":"alesancor1","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/pull/853","summary":"Adds a how-to guide for inspecting rocks with dive. 515 days old, zero reviewer engagement, targets docs/how-to/rocks/ path that no longer exists after docs reorganization into crafting/chiseling subdirectories.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"The PR targets docs/how-to/rocks/ which no longer exists after the docs were reorganized into crafting/, chiseling/, and web-app-rocks/ subdirectories (commits #877, #1068, #1316). The dive-based rock inspection content is still relevant and not covered by existing docs, but the file paths and toctree entries need rework to fit the current structure. A maintainer should decide whether to request an update from the author or close and re-scope.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":10,"confidence":72},"age_days":527,"labels":["Type: Documentation"],"created_at":"2025-04-03T14:53:41+00:00","updated_at":"2025-12-11T14:28:24+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":10,"support_request":null,"confidence":72,"impact":20,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":5173,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"502","title":"Refactor platform validation","author":"mr-cal","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/502","summary":"Code debt: consolidate platform validation from BuildPlanner into Project model. BuildPlanner no longer exists in the codebase; platform validation is now in Project using craft_application's Platform model. Inactive for 381 days, no labels or maintainer engagement.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue targets consolidating platform validation from rockcraft.models.BuildPlanner into rockcraft.models.Project, but BuildPlanner no longer exists in the codebase (grep returns zero matches). The craft-platform refactoring (PR #715, commit 516d29e5) and subsequent 'use default build planner' commit (5f898b32) already consolidated platform handling into Project, which now uses craft_application.models.Platform with a single _validate_all_platforms field validator. The specific code structure the issue references is gone, making the task moot.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":9.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":40,"confidence":65,"support_request":0},"age_days":918,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-03-08T21:48:05+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:12:47+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":40,"support_request":0,"confidence":65,"impact":15,"quick_win":9.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":13393,"project_name":"craft-cli","source":"github","external_id":"347","title":"Handle interactive terminal inside emitter stream context","author":"cmatsuoka","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-cli/issues/347","summary":"Feature request to allow interactive terminal I/O (shell, debug) to escape output redirection when running inside an open_stream emitter context for craft test spread runs. Open 468 days with zero activity, no labels, no comments, no assignee.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no comments, no assignee, and no maintainer response in 468 days. The open_stream() implementation in craft_cli/messages.py still unconditionally pipes subprocess output to stderr with no mechanism to yield the terminal for interactive use. The project remains active (recent commits through #479) so the feature gap is still relevant, but no one has assessed or prioritised it.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":16.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":60,"confidence":72,"support_request":10},"age_days":480,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-05-20T13:34:38+00:00","updated_at":"2025-05-20T13:34:38+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":60,"support_request":10,"confidence":72,"impact":40,"quick_win":16.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":4889,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"786","title":"docs: fix reference to OCI CMD","author":"cjdcordeiro","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/pull/786","summary":"Docs fix correcting an inaccurate statement about OCI CMD usage in Pebble entrypoint docs. Trivial +2/-3 line change by a maintainer, pending review for 381 days with no reviewer assigned.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"The PR is a trivial 2-line docs correction by a maintainer that fixes an inaccurate statement about OCI CMD. While 381 days old with no reviewer, the underlying inaccuracy in the docs still appears present (OCI CMD references remain in project.py docstrings and docs/reuse/links.txt), so the fix is still applicable. Needs a maintainer to approve and land.","scores":{"impact":10,"quick_win":9.5,"staleness":75,"complexity":5,"confidence":70},"age_days":612,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-01-08T11:58:05+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:12:54+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":5,"support_request":null,"confidence":70,"impact":10,"quick_win":9.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":6267,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"5614","title":"Expose the build base name in snapcraft.yaml","author":"bschimke95","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/5614","summary":"Feature request to expose the build base name (e.g. core22) as an environment variable in snapcraft.yaml to avoid hardcoding. Triaged and acknowledged by a maintainer who noted a workaround exists but agreed an env var would be better. Inactive for over a year.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is triaged (Status: Triaged label) and acknowledged by maintainer mr-cal who agreed an environment variable would be better for base-independent code, though noted a workaround exists. The feature remains unimplemented and relevant, so it should stay open despite inactivity.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":30.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":25,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":425,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2025-07-15T06:31:06+00:00","updated_at":"2025-07-21T13:45:39+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":25,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":40,"quick_win":30.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":6379,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"5500","title":"Handle project variables with curly braces in app commands","author":"mr-cal","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/5500","summary":"Regression: Snapcraft fails when project variables with curly braces (e.g. ${SNAPCRAFT_PROJECT_NAME}) are used in app commands, introduced by PR #5183. Triaged bug, open and inactive for ~15 months.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is a confirmed regression (labeled Status: Triaged, Type: Bug) with a clear reproducer and a known introducing PR (#5183). No fix has been merged yet — the related commit abd5db829 (#5499) addresses variable evaluation in the project file but does not close this issue, and the issue remains open with no resolution. Inactivity alone is not sufficient to close a valid, triaged bug.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":40,"confidence":70,"support_request":0},"age_days":479,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Bug"],"created_at":"2025-05-21T16:42:29+00:00","updated_at":"2025-05-21T16:45:11+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":40,"support_request":0,"confidence":70,"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":4994,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"681","title":"New OverlayUnmountError with 5.21 lxd","author":"tigarmo","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/681","summary":"Overlay-using spread tests (overlay-logs, usrmerge-file-collision) fail on LXD 5.21 with OverlayUnmountError: umount of /root/overlay/overlay returns exit status 32 after 5 retries. Reported 2024-08-26, no maintainer response, no labels, no assignee. Likely related to craft-parts chroot unmount handling.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"No maintainer has responded, labelled, or assigned this issue since it was filed 735 days ago — only the Jira sync bot commented. The bug is real (spread test failures with a clear log showing umount exit status 32 after retries), but it has never been triaged. The craft-parts repo has a related fix (aea85f07, 'Make mounted devices private before recursively unmounting the chroot', PR #1348) that may address the root cause, but there is no explicit cross-reference confirming it fixes this specific LXD 5.21 regression.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":55,"confidence":55,"support_request":10},"age_days":747,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-08-26T16:30:08+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:12:48+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":55,"support_request":10,"confidence":55,"impact":40,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":5010,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"665","title":"create new Spread task for daily compatibility matrix testing","author":"cjdcordeiro","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/665","summary":"Feature request to add a dedicated daily spread test that runs rockcraft pack across multiple LXD/multipass/docker versions to catch dependency breakage early. Maintainer discussion on 2024-08-08; no implementation found in current codebase.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue was discussed by maintainers (tigarmo raised maintenance-burden concerns, cjdcordeiro responded with rationale) but no PR or commit implementing a dedicated compatibility-matrix spread task was found in the repo. The spread workflow does run on a schedule (cron 0 0 */2 * *) but only tests the current LXD version, not a matrix of versions. The underlying need (catching LXD/multipass breakage) remains valid given ongoing spread test churn in the repo.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":20.25,"staleness":75,"complexity":55,"confidence":70,"support_request":5},"age_days":766,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-08-08T08:27:57+00:00","updated_at":"2024-08-08T17:53:47+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":55,"support_request":5,"confidence":70,"impact":45,"quick_win":20.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":6622,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"5257","title":"Show artifact name and overall progress when uploading a snap with components","author":"farshidtz","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/5257","summary":"Enhancement: when uploading a snap with components, the progress bar shows only 'Uploading...' without the artifact name or overall progress. Triaged and acknowledged as a good UX improvement; no work since April 2025 and the code still shows the same behavior.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is triaged (labels 'Status: Triaged', 'Type: Enhancement') and maintainer mr-cal acknowledged it on 2025-04-21 as 'a good UX improvement', noting it would require experimentation to integrate craft-cli's progress bar with craft-store uploads. I verified the code at HEAD still uses emit.progress_bar('Uploading...', ...) without the artifact name, so the problem is still applicable and the enhancement remains valid, just not yet scheduled.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":13.75,"staleness":75,"complexity":45,"confidence":85,"support_request":5},"age_days":577,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2025-02-13T08:21:34+00:00","updated_at":"2025-04-21T17:46:29+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":45,"support_request":5,"confidence":85,"impact":25,"quick_win":13.75,"has_related_links":false},{"id":6838,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"5041","title":"Docs: Add guide for multiarch snaps","author":"sed-i","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/5041","summary":"Docs request for a multiarch snaps guide (one snap per arch, cross-building, CI setup, supported platforms). Reporter acknowledged partial resolution in Oct 2024; platform docs since rewritten and reorganized in the repo.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The reporter stated in Oct 2024 that the questions were 'addressed, at least partially' via a forum post, and a maintainer (dilyn-corner) answered each question with links to existing docs. Since then, the platform docs were rewritten (PR #6069) and reorganized (PR #5440), and a dedicated cross-compilation how-to (docs/how-to/integrations/craft-a-cross-compiled-app.rst) now exists, covering all four questions raised. No activity in ~18 months.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":24.5,"staleness":75,"complexity":30,"confidence":75,"support_request":20},"age_days":729,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-09-14T01:13:41+00:00","updated_at":"2025-03-13T18:36:55+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":30,"support_request":20,"confidence":75,"impact":35,"quick_win":24.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":6896,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"4982","title":"Support `kernel.yaml` similar to `gadget.yaml`","author":"dilyn-corner","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/4982","summary":"Request to support kernel.yaml as a snap metadata file moved to meta/ by Snapcraft. Core feature implemented via PR #3464 and #6369; remaining gadget.yaml location work tracked in #4344. Inactive 461 days.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The primary request — copying kernel.yaml to meta/ for kernel snaps — is implemented: PR #3464 (merged) added the copy in setup_assets.py, and PR #6369 added mediated packaging in package.py with full test coverage. The reporter's own last comment (2024-09-10) states 'this issue is now basically identical to #4344', which remains open for the snap/ subdirectory location question. The issue is also inactive for 461 days.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":22.5,"staleness":75,"complexity":25,"confidence":88,"support_request":10},"age_days":755,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2024-08-18T23:10:50+00:00","updated_at":"2025-05-27T21:36:43+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":25,"support_request":10,"confidence":88,"impact":30,"quick_win":22.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":6910,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"4968","title":"Add a `bundler-version` property to the `core18` Ruby plugin ","author":"mr-cal","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/4968","summary":"Feature request to add a `bundler-version` property to the `core18` Ruby plugin to pin bundler versions and prevent build failures due to unpinned bundler requiring newer Ruby. Issue is triaged (Status: Triaged, Type: Enhancement) with an internal Jira ticket created (CRAFT-3234). No implementation found in current codebase.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is triaged with an internal Jira ticket (CRAFT-3234) and represents a legitimate enhancement request. While core18 support has been removed from the main snapcraft codebase (commit 40136ea9b), the issue may still be relevant for users on older snapcraft versions (7.x track) who build core18 snaps. The feature would require adding a new property to the Ruby plugin and implementing version pinning logic, which is a moderate complexity task. No evidence of implementation in the current codebase.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":27.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":40,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":759,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2024-08-14T17:48:45+00:00","updated_at":"2025-04-24T16:14:34+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":45,"quick_win":27.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":6927,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"4951","title":"Consider adding flag to extensions to list experimental extensions","author":"hartmutobendorf","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/4951","summary":"Feature request to add --all flag to list-extensions to show experimental extensions and display env var hint. The extensions command (renamed from list-extensions) already lists all extensions including experimental ones, as confirmed by docs. Only the env var hint in output remains unimplemented. No maintainer engagement in ~2 years.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The primary request is already implemented: the extensions command (renamed from list-extensions in #5828) iterates over all registered extensions without filtering by experimental status, and the docs explicitly state 'The output includes all extensions, both stable and experimental, without differentiating them.' The remaining ask (showing the SNAPCRAFT_ENABLE_EXPERIMENTAL_EXTENSIONS hint in output) is a minor enhancement. The issue has no labels, no maintainer response, and no activity in ~18 months, with only a bot Jira ticket comment.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":17.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":15,"confidence":72,"support_request":10},"age_days":772,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-08-02T08:28:32+00:00","updated_at":"2025-03-13T18:37:11+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":15,"support_request":10,"confidence":72,"impact":20,"quick_win":17.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":22197,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"888","title":"Create a plugin template and docs for how to write a plugin","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/888","summary":"Request for a plugin template and docs on writing a plugin. The how-to guide (docs/how-to/create_plugin.rst) was added in PR #928 and a documentation template (docs/how-to/document-plugin.rst) exists, so the core work appears done. Issue is 674 days old with no comments or labels.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue asks for a plugin template and docs for writing a plugin. Both have been delivered: docs/how-to/create_plugin.rst was added by PR #928 (commit 53eb1b33, 'doc: create new how-to on creating a plugin') and docs/how-to/document-plugin.rst provides a documentation template. The issue has had zero comments and no activity for over a year, and the requested work is already merged into the repository, making it no longer actionable.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":27.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":40,"confidence":80,"support_request":10},"age_days":686,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-10-26T14:23:51+00:00","updated_at":"2025-03-11T14:28:50+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":80,"impact":45,"quick_win":27.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":22297,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"788","title":"launchpad builder won't clone one of three identical repos","author":"popey","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/788","summary":"Launchpad remote build fails to git clone anchore/grype while identical syft/grant repos succeed. Root cause: grype's .gitmodules uses an SSH URL, which fails in Launchpad's keyless environment. Reporter confirmed. Tarball workaround works.","suggested_action":"close_not_a_bug","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer @dariuszd21 identified the root cause: grype's .gitmodules uses an SSH URL, and `git clone --recursive` fails in Launchpad's keyless environment. The reporter agreed ('this is likely going to be the quick fix') and confirmed a tarball workaround works. The behavior is working as intended — the fix is on the upstream repo/user side, not in craft-parts. The related error-messaging improvement is tracked separately in craft-parts#821 (moved to Jira CRAFT-3273).","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":16.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":20,"confidence":75,"support_request":45},"age_days":785,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-07-19T15:46:34+00:00","updated_at":"2025-03-11T14:28:38+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":20,"support_request":45,"confidence":75,"impact":20,"quick_win":16.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":7475,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"4402","title":"icon is not handle properly when base is core22","author":"tsunghanliu","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/4402","summary":"Icon not placed in prime/meta/gui when base is core22 (snapcraft 7.5.3); works on core20. No maintainer response, no labels, 0 comments, last activity 536 days ago.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no assignee, and zero comments from any maintainer, so it has never been triaged. It is a genuine bug report with a clear reproduction (icon.png missing from prime/meta/gui on core22 but present on core20), not a support request. The code path (setup_assets.py / _finalize_icon) still exists and has since been refactored for mediated icon handling, so the bug may or may not persist in current versions — a maintainer needs to reproduce and confirm before closing or fixing.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":40,"confidence":55,"support_request":5},"age_days":1065,"labels":[],"created_at":"2023-10-13T14:07:26+00:00","updated_at":"2025-03-13T18:37:05+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":40,"support_request":5,"confidence":55,"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":5142,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"533","title":"Please test against non-EOL Fedora release","author":"zyga","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/533","summary":"Request to update spread CI tests from EOL Fedora 37 to a current release. Already addressed: spread.yaml now tests on fedora-44-64 (via OpenStack migration #1279), so the request is fulfilled and the issue can be closed.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The request is fully implemented: commit d81fc0cb bumped the spread worker from Fedora 37 to 39, and current spread.yaml (line 48) now uses fedora-44-64, a non-EOL release, introduced by PR #1279. The only comment is an auto-generated Jira sync bot message with no maintainer engagement, and the original problem no longer exists in the codebase.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":13.5,"staleness":75,"complexity":10,"confidence":85,"support_request":10},"age_days":885,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-04-10T16:14:41+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:12:40+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":10,"support_request":10,"confidence":85,"impact":15,"quick_win":13.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":2165,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"1964","title":"Provide internal documentation for templates","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/1964","summary":"Internal task to add explanatory comments in charmcraft templates for ignored linter rules, originating from PR #1941 review. Open 684 days with no maintainer activity beyond a Jira ticket sync.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 684 days old with last activity 381 days ago (only the Jira bot comment). The templates have been extensively refactored since PR #1941 (uv, Jubilant, ruff updates in #2312, #2430, #2623, #2754, etc.), so the original linter-ignore context from the flake8/pydocstyle-to-ruff migration is largely obsolete. No maintainer has engaged beyond the auto-created Jira ticket, and the task is low-priority internal documentation with minimal impact.","scores":{"impact":10,"quick_win":9.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":10,"confidence":70,"support_request":0},"age_days":696,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-10-16T14:47:07+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:17:54+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":10,"support_request":0,"confidence":70,"impact":10,"quick_win":9.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":2167,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"1962","title":"Spread test the documentation examples","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/1962","summary":"Feature request to add spread tests for documentation examples (like Rockcraft) to prevent them from becoming outdated. Open since 2023, no labels/assignees, only a Jira-sync bot comment; no evidence of implementation.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no assignee, and the only comment is an autogenerated Jira-sync bot message (CRAFT-3570), so it shows no sign of maintainer triage. It is a legitimate internal feature request from a maintainer (lengau), and while a related commit 'ci(docs): spread test documentation (#2126)' exists, there is no evidence it implemented the requested example-testing, so it should be triaged rather than closed.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":16.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":60,"confidence":65,"support_request":0},"age_days":696,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-10-16T14:08:12+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:17:55+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":60,"support_request":0,"confidence":65,"impact":40,"quick_win":16.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":12391,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"682","title":"Upstream Charmcraft's store service","author":"mr-cal","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/issues/682","summary":"Request to upstream Charmcraft's store service into craft-application to de-duplicate code. Open 532 days with only an auto-generated Jira sync comment (CRAFT-4336); no labels, assignee, or maintainer response. Store service still not present in craft_application/services.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no assignee, and no human maintainer comments — only an auto-generated Jira sync bot comment (CRAFT-4336) from 2025-03-17. Code inspection confirms the store service has not been upstreamed: no StoreService class exists in craft_application/services, and craft_store is still only referenced as a logger name in application.py. The underlying need remains valid but the issue has sat untriaged for over 17 months.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":15.75,"staleness":75,"complexity":55,"confidence":70,"support_request":5},"age_days":544,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-03-17T12:47:05+00:00","updated_at":"2025-05-23T17:26:46+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":55,"support_request":5,"confidence":70,"impact":35,"quick_win":15.75,"has_related_links":false},{"id":21543,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1546","title":"Support download part source from FTP URLs","author":"brlin-tw","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/1546","summary":"Feature request to implement FTP URL support for part source downloads in craft-parts. Currently base.py raises NotImplementedError for ftp scheme. No maintainer response, no labels, no activity in 139 days.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no maintainer comments, and no activity for 139 days. The FTP download is still unimplemented (base.py line 309-310 raises NotImplementedError). While the request is valid, it requires triage to determine priority and scope.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":21.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":40,"confidence":80,"support_request":10},"age_days":151,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-04-14T17:53:09+00:00","updated_at":"2026-04-14T17:53:09+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":80,"impact":35,"quick_win":21.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":22409,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"675","title":"Python plugin is not idempotent on iterative builds due to faulty `PATH` set up","author":"NucciTheBoss","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/675","summary":"Python plugin PATH setup causes non-idempotent iterative builds: on rebuild, the venv python in the install dir shadows the build-package python, breaking venv creation. Untriaged since filing 913 days ago; code refactored but core PATH logic unchanged.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"No maintainer has responded, labeled, or assigned this issue since it was filed 913 days ago; the only comment is an automated Jira sync bot message from 538 days ago. The core problem persists in current code: `get_build_environment()` in `base.py` still prepends `{part_install_dir}/bin` to `PATH`, and `_get_create_venv_commands()` still invokes `${PARTS_PYTHON_INTERPRETER} -m venv` without guarding against a stale or incomplete venv interpreter being resolved first on iterative builds. The plugin was refactored (commit 13cfedfb, PR #819) and a `python_v2` plugin was added, but no commit or PR explicitly addresses this idempotency bug. Needs a maintainer to assess whether the current architecture still exhibits the failure and to scope a fix.","scores":{"impact":60,"quick_win":27.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":55,"confidence":70,"support_request":5},"age_days":925,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-03-01T19:14:20+00:00","updated_at":"2025-03-11T14:28:34+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":55,"support_request":5,"confidence":70,"impact":60,"quick_win":27.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":21849,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1236","title":"dotnet (v2) plugin: Support `disable-parallel` parameter","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/1236","summary":"Enhancement to add the disable-parallel part property to the dotnet v2 plugin, mirroring the autotools plugin. Labeled Needs information; maintainer awaits a real-world use case. No comments or activity in 363 days; feature still absent from the plugin at HEAD.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is labeled 'Status: Needs information' and the maintainer explicitly states it is 'extremely low priority until someone shows us a real-world use case'; 363 days have passed with 0 comments and no use case provided, far exceeding the 6-month threshold for unresponded information requests. The dotnet plugin at HEAD still lacks the property, so it can be closed and reopened if a concrete use case (e.g. a dotnet app that fails parallel builds) ever surfaces.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":10.5,"staleness":75,"complexity":30,"confidence":80,"support_request":5},"age_days":375,"labels":["Type: Enhancement","Status: Needs information"],"created_at":"2025-09-02T15:24:06+00:00","updated_at":"2025-09-02T15:24:06+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":30,"support_request":5,"confidence":80,"impact":15,"quick_win":10.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":22250,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"835","title":"Document the creation and use of stage-packages filters","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/835","summary":"Documentation task to write a how-to for register_stage_packages_filter; the function still exists with a confusing docstring implying deprecation, and no how-to has been written. No labels, no comments, no assignee after 725 days.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue lacks labels, has no assignee, and shows no sign of being categorised or prioritised despite being filed by a maintainer (lengau). The underlying problem is still present: register_stage_packages_filter exists in craft_parts/callbacks.py with a docstring stating 'This is now deprecated', and no how-to documentation for it exists in docs/how-to/. However, 538 days of inactivity means it needs a maintainer to confirm whether this is still a priority or whether the deprecation note in the docstring should be addressed first.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":24.5,"staleness":75,"complexity":30,"confidence":80,"support_request":10},"age_days":737,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-09-05T16:04:01+00:00","updated_at":"2025-03-11T14:28:53+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":30,"support_request":10,"confidence":80,"impact":35,"quick_win":24.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":39774,"project_name":"craft-providers","source":"github","external_id":"213","title":"Use alternate lxd profiles","author":"cmatsuoka","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-providers/issues/213","summary":"Enhancement request to add CRAFT_PROVIDERS_LXD_PROFILE env var for alternate LXD profiles. Open 3.5 years with one maintainer comment, no implementation.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has been open for 1298 days with only one maintainer comment (@mr-cal) offering implementation thoughts but no clear direction, prioritization, or assignment. While it has a label and some engagement, it lacks the maintainer buy-in or active work needed to keep_open, and there's no evidence the feature is irrelevant to close_stale. It needs proper triage to determine if this enhancement is still desired.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":40,"confidence":65,"support_request":10},"age_days":1306,"labels":["Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2023-02-14T13:36:56+00:00","updated_at":"2026-04-22T02:50:21+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":65,"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":39783,"project_name":"craft-providers","source":"github","external_id":"420","title":" docs: bring all starter pack documentation checks into tox","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-providers/issues/420","summary":"Enhancement to integrate Sphinx docs starter pack linters (Woke, linkcheck, pyspelling) into tox. Related issue craft-store#105 closed because project is moving away from tox.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The related issue craft-store#105 with the identical title was closed because the maintainer stated the project is moving away from tox, making this request no longer applicable. This issue is 1064 days old with no maintainer engagement, and the core premise (using tox for CI) is no longer relevant to the project.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":12.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":20,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":1072,"labels":["Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2023-10-06T21:55:10+00:00","updated_at":"2026-04-22T02:50:09+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":20,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":15,"quick_win":12.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":6943,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"4935","title":"snapcraft cannot connect through a transparent SSL proxy","author":"ghost","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/4935","summary":"snapcraft fails with SSL CERTIFICATE_VERIFY_FAILED behind a transparent MITM proxy because it does not use the system CA store; workaround is REQUESTS_CA_BUNDLE. Reported on 8.3.1/7.5.5; maintainer asked a clarifying question, no labels or fix yet.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"No labels, no assignee, and only a single clarifying question from @lengau (2024-07-24) with no further maintainer action; the reporter's answer (2024-07-26) was never followed up. A related commit 6a4aa6ff0 'use system certificates by default for https requests (#3252)' exists but its scope relative to this transparent-proxy case is unconfirmed, so the issue still needs triage to determine whether it is already addressed.","scores":{"impact":55,"quick_win":30.25,"staleness":75,"complexity":45,"confidence":55,"support_request":10},"age_days":780,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-07-24T10:34:16+00:00","updated_at":"2025-03-13T18:36:40+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":45,"support_request":10,"confidence":55,"impact":55,"quick_win":30.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":39846,"project_name":"craft-providers","source":"github","external_id":"859","title":"fix: add explicit test IDs to environment parametrizations","author":"Copilot","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-providers/pull/859","summary":"Adds explicit test IDs to parametrized tests in almalinux, centos_7, and ubuntu_buildd test files to fix pytest collection errors caused by newline characters in auto-generated test IDs.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"The PR fixes a real pytest collection error (issue #858) by adding explicit test IDs to parametrized tests, preventing newline characters from breaking test setup. The change is minimal (+6/-0 lines) and correct, but has been inactive for 273 days without maintainer review or merge.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":42.5,"staleness":75,"complexity":15,"confidence":70},"age_days":281,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-12-06T03:08:00+00:00","updated_at":"2025-12-06T03:51:05+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":15,"support_request":null,"confidence":70,"impact":50,"quick_win":42.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":39847,"project_name":"craft-providers","source":"github","external_id":"796","title":"Improve approach to waiting for Multipass start","author":"bepri","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-providers/issues/796","summary":"Enhancement to replace hardcoded 20-second sleep with reliable polling for Multipass daemon startup after installation. Triaged but inactive for over a year.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is triaged (labeled Type: Enhancement, Status: Triaged) and the enhancement is still relevant—the hardcoded `time.sleep(20)` in `installer.py` line 56 remains unchanged. The `wait_until_ready()` method already exists and polls for multipassd readiness, so the fix would involve removing the redundant sleep or adjusting its placement. However, the 352-day inactivity suggests this is low priority.","scores":{"impact":60,"quick_win":42.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":30,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":396,"labels":["Type: Enhancement","Status: Triaged"],"created_at":"2025-08-12T17:26:41+00:00","updated_at":"2025-09-17T20:54:33+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":30,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":60,"quick_win":42.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":11959,"project_name":"debcraft","source":"github","external_id":"40","title":"Figure out `maintainer` vs. `contact` in debcraft.yaml fields","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/debcraft/issues/40","summary":"Open design question on whether debcraft.yaml's required maintainer field overlaps with the generic craft contact field, and how contact should map into the built artifact. No labels, comments, or maintainer response in 285 days; code still has a TODO comment (contact -> Maintainer) in project.py.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is an unlabelled, unassigned design question with zero comments and no maintainer acknowledgement in 285 days, so it has not been triaged. It is still relevant: debcraft/models/project.py retains the comment '# contact -> Maintainer' and the schema still defines a separate contact field, so the question remains unresolved. Not stale-closable because the underlying ambiguity persists in current code.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":15.75,"staleness":75,"complexity":55,"confidence":70,"support_request":0},"age_days":297,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-11-19T15:24:27+00:00","updated_at":"2025-11-19T15:24:27+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":55,"support_request":0,"confidence":70,"impact":35,"quick_win":15.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":40748,"project_name":"snapcraft-rocks","source":"github","external_id":"116","title":"ci: always discard spread workers in build-rock tests (core22-7)","author":"lengau","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft-rocks/pull/116","summary":"Adds spread worker cleanup step to build-rock.yaml workflow to prevent leaked GCP VM instances. Inactive 56 days with unresolved review comment and failing CI checks.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"Similar cleanup changes have been merged in related PRs #115 (core22-8) and #117 (core24-8), indicating this pattern has been implemented elsewhere. This PR has been inactive for 56 days with an unresolved review comment and failing CI checks on build-rock jobs, suggesting it is no longer actively maintained.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":34.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":15,"confidence":70},"age_days":64,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-07-10T19:00:32+00:00","updated_at":"2026-07-10T19:03:44+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":15,"support_request":null,"confidence":70,"impact":40,"quick_win":34.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":12241,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"833","title":"`test` command gives unhelpful error message if extension file is not executable","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/issues/833","summary":"test command fails with a confusing 'backend craft allocate must print ADDRESS' error when spread/.extension lacks the executable bit; open, unlabelled beyond Type: Bug, no comments or fix found in current code.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 397 days old with zero comments and no maintainer acknowledgement, so it has not been triaged. However, it is not stale-irrelevant: the current code in craft_application/services/testing.py still invokes `./spread/.extension allocate` directly (line 362) with no executable-bit check, so the unhelpful error is still reproducible. The fix is small (validate the extension file is executable before running spread, or invoke it via a shell), so it should be kept open and triaged rather than closed.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":28.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":20,"confidence":78,"support_request":5},"age_days":409,"labels":["Type: Bug"],"created_at":"2025-07-30T13:51:53+00:00","updated_at":"2025-07-30T13:51:53+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":20,"support_request":5,"confidence":78,"impact":35,"quick_win":28.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":2695,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"1433","title":"Improve Documentation for 'charmcraft help analyze' Command","author":"mateofloreza","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/1433","summary":"Request to improve documentation for the charmcraft analyze command. The command exists (analyse.py) with a hidden US-English alias, and docs/reference/analyzers-and-linters.rst covers the checks but not command usage. No maintainer activity in ~13 months.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"No labels, no comments, no maintainer interaction in 994 days — the issue has never been triaged. The underlying request is still valid: docs/reference/analyzers-and-linters.rst documents the linters but not the analyze command's usage (filepath arg, --ignore, --format), and no dedicated command reference page exists. It's a low-complexity doc improvement that remains actionable.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":20.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":20,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":1006,"labels":[],"created_at":"2023-12-11T11:21:48+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:18:16+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":20,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":25,"quick_win":20.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":4888,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"787","title":"Update .NET download URL to new domain","author":"mateusrodrigues","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/pull/787","summary":"Two-line change updating a .NET SDK download URL from the old download.visualstudio.microsoft.com domain to the new builds.dotnet.microsoft.com domain, per dotnet/core#9671. Approved by one reviewer, no CI checks, no comments, inactive for over a year.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"The PR is a trivial two-line URL update that was approved by one reviewer, but it has been inactive for 381 days with no CI checks recorded. The current rockcraft repo no longer contains any download.visualstudio.microsoft.com references (the dotnet plugin now lives in craft-parts and uses builds.dotnet.microsoft.com), so the target file/line may no longer exist in the current codebase. A maintainer should verify whether the change still applies before merging or closing.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":19.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":5,"confidence":55},"age_days":606,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-01-14T14:25:06+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:12:53+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":5,"support_request":null,"confidence":55,"impact":20,"quick_win":19.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":13479,"project_name":"craft-cli","source":"github","external_id":"261","title":"Disable long option abbreviation (`--destructive` vs `--destructive-mode`)","author":"mattculler","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-cli/issues/261","summary":"Feature request to set allow_abbrev=False on craft-cli's ArgumentParser to disable argparse long-option abbreviation (e.g. --destructive matching --destructive-mode). Open, unlabelled, unassigned; only a Jira-sync bot comment; code still lacks the flag.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no assignee, and no maintainer response — the only comment is an autogenerated Jira-sync bot message (CRAFT-3114). The underlying problem is still live in the code: neither _CustomArgumentParser in craft_cli/dispatcher.py nor the parsers in craft_cli/completion/completion.py set allow_abbrev=False, and no commit has addressed it. It needs a maintainer to categorise and prioritise it.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":17.5,"staleness":75,"complexity":30,"confidence":78,"support_request":10},"age_days":792,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-07-12T19:16:53+00:00","updated_at":"2025-03-10T18:59:04+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":30,"support_request":10,"confidence":78,"impact":25,"quick_win":17.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":7009,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"4869","title":"Truncated error in hash mismatch output","author":"sergiusens","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/4869","summary":"Snapcraft CLI truncates the source-checksum mismatch error message with an ellipsis, hiding the obtained hash. Reported by maintainer sergiusens 801 days ago with no comments, labels, or follow-up activity.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"No maintainer has responded, labelled, or acknowledged this issue in 801 days. The truncation source is not confirmed in either snapcraft or craft-parts code (no ellipsis character found in either repo), so the exact fix location is unclear. The issue is a real UX bug with a clear reproduction, but it needs a maintainer to identify where the truncation occurs before it can be addressed.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":24.5,"staleness":75,"complexity":30,"confidence":55,"support_request":0},"age_days":813,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-06-21T22:50:23+00:00","updated_at":"2024-06-21T22:50:23+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":30,"support_request":0,"confidence":55,"impact":35,"quick_win":24.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":15828,"project_name":"starbase","source":"github","external_id":"417","title":"Docs: Implement an alternative link checker","author":"medubelko","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/starbase/issues/417","summary":"Proposal to replace Sphinx's link checker with a faster alternative after it caused a 6-hour build hang on gnu.org. Triaged by maintainer but inactive for over a year; Sphinx linkcheck is still in use in the codebase.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is labeled 'Status: Triaged' and the problem remains unresolved: docs/Makefile still invokes 'sphinx-build -b linkcheck' and docs/conf.py still sets 'linkcheck_retries = 20'. The 6-hour CI hang risk from external sites blocking requests is still present, so the issue is not irrelevant despite its age. No PR or follow-up has been filed to address it.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":24.75,"staleness":75,"complexity":45,"confidence":80,"support_request":5},"age_days":418,"labels":["Status: Triaged"],"created_at":"2025-07-21T17:55:08+00:00","updated_at":"2025-07-21T17:55:27+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":45,"support_request":5,"confidence":80,"impact":45,"quick_win":24.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":21578,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1511","title":"[DO NOT MERGE] test on Ubuntu Resolute","author":"lengau","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/pull/1511","summary":"CI test PR titled '[DO NOT MERGE] test on Ubuntu Resolute' (51+/12-, 6 files) by maintainer lengau; 0 comments, no reviews, 161 days inactive, 15 CI jobs failing including resolute amd64 and Conventional Commits title check.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The title explicitly says '[DO NOT MERGE]' and it is a throwaway test PR with zero comments or reviews in 161 days. Resolute CI coverage was already added to main via #1398 ('build(deps): add Ubuntu resolute') and #1530 ('fix(test): enable the java plugin tests on resolute'), so the purpose of this PR is already fulfilled elsewhere and the branch is stale.","scores":{"impact":10,"quick_win":7.5,"staleness":75,"complexity":25,"confidence":70},"age_days":173,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-03-23T15:55:09+00:00","updated_at":"2026-03-23T17:21:19+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":25,"support_request":null,"confidence":70,"impact":10,"quick_win":7.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":21734,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1351","title":"feature(pro_sources): mount package sources","author":"clay-lake","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/pull/1351","summary":"Adds mount_package_sources for Rockcraft pro_sources and refactors the Mount class to support bind/rbind and ramFS clone mounts. Pending review with 0 reviewers, 332 days old, and broad CI failures across many architectures.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"The PR is 332 days old with no maintainer interaction and widespread CI failures, but the author requested help from @upils on 2025-10-03 and the feature (mounting apt sources into overlays) is still relevant to Rockcraft pro_sources. The Mount class refactor and new mount types are non-trivial, so a maintainer should review whether this approach is still wanted before merging or closing.","scores":{"impact":55,"quick_win":16.5,"staleness":75,"complexity":70,"confidence":65},"age_days":344,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-10-03T19:24:44+00:00","updated_at":"2025-10-03T20:03:56+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":70,"support_request":null,"confidence":65,"impact":55,"quick_win":16.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":21735,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1350","title":"feature(pro_sources): craftctl chroot cmd","author":"clay-lake","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/pull/1350","summary":"Adds a craftctl chroot subcommand to modify overlays during overlay-script for Rockcraft's pro_sources feature. Approved by 1 reviewer but has 4 unresolved comments, failing CI, and ~9.5 months of inactivity.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"The PR has 4 unresolved review comments and failing CI (test-common slow tests and minimum dependencies), and the author requested a review on 2025-10-03 with no subsequent activity. The feature is still relevant to the pro_sources workstream, but the unresolved comments and CI failures need to be addressed before it can be merged.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":20.25,"staleness":75,"complexity":55,"confidence":65},"age_days":344,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-10-03T18:49:39+00:00","updated_at":"2025-10-07T21:30:51+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":55,"support_request":null,"confidence":65,"impact":45,"quick_win":20.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":21794,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1291","title":"BUILD step of a part organizing to the overlay should invalidate overlay contents of following parts","author":"upils","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/1291","summary":"craft-parts bug: when a part organizing to the overlay re-runs its BUILD step, dependent parts' OVERLAY steps should be invalidated and re-executed, but they are skipped. Filed by a maintainer from PR #1261 discussion; unlabelled, 0 comments, inactive ~1 year.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no comments, and no maintainer response in ~354 days, so it has not been triaged. It is a genuine bug with a concrete reproducer (test_basic_lifecycle_actions in tests/integration/lifecycle/test_lifecycle_organize_to_overlay.py, where bar's OVERLAY is skipped as 'already ran' after foo's source changes) and is not stale-irrelevant: the overlay/organize feature is still actively developed (e.g. #1618, #1602), and the test file now encodes the expected UPDATE behavior for bar's OVERLAY step, suggesting the fix may be in progress or partially landed. Closing would be premature; a maintainer should confirm whether #1618 or the sequencer overlay-verification work already covers this.","scores":{"impact":55,"quick_win":19.25,"staleness":75,"complexity":65,"confidence":60,"support_request":5},"age_days":366,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-09-11T15:35:06+00:00","updated_at":"2025-09-11T15:35:06+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":65,"support_request":5,"confidence":60,"impact":55,"quick_win":19.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":2100,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2029","title":"Run documentation spread tests in CI","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/2029","summary":"Maintainer task to create a CI job for docs spread tests. The workflow (spread-docs.yaml) now exists and runs on PRs/pushes/weekly. The google backend failure reported by @erinecon was addressed by switching backends. Issue remains open but work appears complete.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The CI job was implemented in PR #2126 (commit f1b73a6e 'ci(docs): spread test documentation') and the .github/workflows/spread-docs.yaml file is active, running on PRs, pushes to main, and weekly. The google backend failure @erinecon reported was resolved by PR #2338 ('docs: replace google for ci and fix tests') and PR #2783 ('ci: use openstack for spread'). No activity in 381 days and the original task is no longer applicable.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":24.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":40,"confidence":72,"support_request":5},"age_days":640,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-12-11T18:26:12+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:17:47+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":40,"support_request":5,"confidence":72,"impact":40,"quick_win":24.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":1866,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2266","title":"build(build-deps): install cargo if not installed","author":"lengau","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/pull/2266","summary":"Adds 3 lines to Makefile to install cargo if missing, needed for non-AMD64/ARM64 CI runners. Change is already present in current Makefile (lines 90-91), making this a no-op. Maintainer raised unaddressed questions about pkg-config and per-arch conditionals 286 days ago.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The exact 3-line change (ifeq which cargo / APT_PACKAGES += cargo / endif) is already present in the current Makefile at lines 90-91, so merging would be a no-op. Additionally, maintainer sergiusens asked on 2025-04-24 about pkg-config, per-architecture conditionals, and resource cost, none of which were addressed in the 286 days since.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":13.5,"staleness":75,"complexity":10,"confidence":85},"age_days":506,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-04-24T15:06:31+00:00","updated_at":"2025-11-18T17:19:45+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":10,"support_request":null,"confidence":85,"impact":15,"quick_win":13.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":2320,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"1809","title":"--project-dir fails to find metadata.yaml when running in destructive mode","author":"andersson1234","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/1809","summary":"charmcraft pack --destructive-mode -p <dir> fails for reactive charms: charm proof cannot find metadata.yaml because the reactive plugin runs it in the wrong directory. Maintainer marked it low priority in Aug 2024; no fix since.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer @lengau triaged it (2024-08-14) as a real bug related to how parts directories are made in destructive mode, and an internal ticket CRAFT-3224 was created, so it is acknowledged but explicitly deprioritized. The reactive plugin still exists in the codebase (charmcraft/parts/plugins/_reactive.py) and runs charm proof from the build dir, so the bug is likely still present, but destructive mode is discouraged and the reporter's workaround (cd into the charm dir) works, keeping impact modest.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":13.5,"staleness":75,"complexity":55,"confidence":65,"support_request":10},"age_days":760,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-08-13T15:49:30+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:18:13+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":55,"support_request":10,"confidence":65,"impact":30,"quick_win":13.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":22313,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"772","title":"Use `parallel_build_count` in plugins and document usage","author":"mr-cal","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/772","summary":"Task to ensure all plugins use ProjectInfo.parallel_build_count and document parallel-build support. rust and scons plugins still don't use it; other plugins (autotools, bazel, cmake, colcon, go, make, qmake) now do. No maintainer response, only a Jira-sync bot comment.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no assignee, and no maintainer response — only an autogenerated Jira-sync bot comment from 2024-07-09. The underlying work is still partially incomplete: rust_plugin.py still runs `cargo build --workspace --release` without `--jobs`, and scons_plugin.py runs `scons` without `-j`, while autotools/bazel/cmake/colcon/go/make/qmake plugins already use `self._part_info.parallel_build_count`. This is a valid, actionable feature/enhancement that needs triage and assignment.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":24.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":40,"confidence":80,"support_request":5},"age_days":795,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-07-09T15:48:16+00:00","updated_at":"2025-03-11T14:28:59+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":40,"support_request":5,"confidence":80,"impact":40,"quick_win":24.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":4184,"project_name":"imagecraft","source":"github","external_id":"283","title":"Imagecraft cannot create i386 images without cross-building","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/imagecraft/issues/283","summary":"Imagecraft cannot create i386 images without cross-building because there is no i386 snapd copy. Filed by a maintainer as a known limitation, not a planned change. No activity in 175 days.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is explicitly framed by the maintainer as a known limitation rather than a bug to fix, and no code or docs have since addressed i386 cross-building. It remains a valid architectural constraint tied to the absence of an i386 snapd, so it should stay open as a tracked limitation rather than be closed as stale or not-a-bug.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":9.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":70,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":187,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-03-09T16:12:27+00:00","updated_at":"2026-03-09T16:12:27+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":70,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":30,"quick_win":9.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":4665,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"1010","title":"feat(template): use images command to poll docker daemon readiness","author":"zhijie-yang","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/pull/1010","summary":"Swaps the Docker daemon readiness poll in the test init template from `docker run hello-world` to `docker images` to avoid Docker Hub rate limits in CI. 1-line change; 312 days inactive, 0 comments, 2 failing CI checks, target line still present at HEAD.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"The PR is long inactive (312 days, 0 comments, 0 reviewers) but the change is still applicable: rockcraft/templates/test/spread.yaml.j2:22 still contains `retry --times=10 --delay 2 -- docker run hello-world` at HEAD, and no commit or issue has superseded it. It needs a maintainer to review the trivial 1-line template change and address the failing snap-tests and lint/files CI checks before landing.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":19.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":5,"confidence":80},"age_days":325,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-10-23T08:16:31+00:00","updated_at":"2025-10-23T08:16:31+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":5,"support_request":null,"confidence":80,"impact":20,"quick_win":19.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":4715,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"960","title":"docs: add uv to list of plugin options and to dependency explanation","author":"fabridamicelli","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/pull/960","summary":"One-line docs change adding uv to the plugin options list and dependency explanation. Approved by 2 reviewers, but 2 unresolved review comments remain and the snap-tests CI job is failing. No activity for ~11 months.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"The PR is a trivial one-line docs fix that has already received 2 approvals, but it has 2 unresolved review comments and a failing snap-tests job, so a maintainer needs to address the open comments and CI before landing. Inactivity alone isn't enough to close it since the change is still relevant (uv plugin is still documented in docs/reference/plugins.rst).","scores":{"impact":10,"quick_win":9.5,"staleness":75,"complexity":5,"confidence":70},"age_days":368,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-09-09T19:35:24+00:00","updated_at":"2025-09-19T20:28:04+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":5,"support_request":null,"confidence":70,"impact":10,"quick_win":9.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":22807,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"275","title":"Refactor integration tests to split data and code","author":"tigarmo","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/275","summary":"Maintainer-proposed refactor of tests/integration to move inline temp-file creation into test-data directories with a datadir-like fixture. Open since 2021, last human comment 2022, no implementation landed; tests still create fixtures inline.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The underlying problem is still present: grep shows no datadir/test-data fixture in tests/conftest.py and integration tests (e.g. tests/integration/sources/test_deb.py) still build sample files inline in tmp_path, so the refactor is not done. It is a maintainer-authored, clearly scoped task with a concrete proposal (per-test data dirs + fixture), but it has had no activity since 2022 and no labels, so it needs triage/prioritization rather than closure.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":12.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":60,"confidence":80,"support_request":0},"age_days":1471,"labels":[],"created_at":"2022-09-02T18:02:44+00:00","updated_at":"2025-03-11T14:29:21+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":60,"support_request":0,"confidence":80,"impact":30,"quick_win":12.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":39285,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"6303","title":"ci: test new secscan action","author":"bepri","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/pull/6303","summary":"PR testing a new secscan CI action that is failing; inactive for 73 days with no maintainer engagement","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The PR has been inactive for 73 days with zero comments and no maintainer engagement. The secscan CI check is failing, and grep confirms the secscan action does not exist in the current codebase, suggesting the feature was not pursued or the PR is no longer applicable.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":26.25,"staleness":75,"complexity":25,"confidence":60},"age_days":81,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-06-23T13:24:05+00:00","updated_at":"2026-06-23T18:53:44+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":25,"support_request":null,"confidence":60,"impact":35,"quick_win":26.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":39341,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"1092","title":"Some tests will require the charm plugin to be enabled","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/issues/1092","summary":"Test configuration requires enabling the charm plugin following upstream charmcraft#2722; currently unlabelled and awaiting maintainer review.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has been open for 81 days with zero comments, labels, or assignee. It references an upstream PR (charmcraft#2722) as the trigger for a test configuration change but lacks specific details on what exactly needs to be 'undone' or how to reproduce the failure, requiring maintainer assessment.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":40.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":20,"confidence":80,"support_request":0},"age_days":89,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-06-15T10:43:57+00:00","updated_at":"2026-06-15T10:43:57+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":20,"support_request":0,"confidence":80,"impact":50,"quick_win":40.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":39369,"project_name":"craft-grammar","source":"github","external_id":"189","title":"ci: test on Python 3.14 and Ubuntu 26.04 (Resolute)","author":"lengau","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-grammar/pull/189","summary":"CI workflow update to add Python 3.14 and Ubuntu 26.04 testing; inactive for 79 days with 3 unresolved review comments and failing CI checks","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The PR has been inactive for 79 days with 3 unresolved review comments and failing CI checks (OSV-scanner, lint). Related PRs in the same ecosystem (e.g., craft-parts#1607) were closed without merging due to CI failures and reviewer concerns about runner root requirements, indicating this change is no longer applicable.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":26.25,"staleness":75,"complexity":25,"confidence":65},"age_days":101,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-06-03T16:38:28+00:00","updated_at":"2026-06-17T19:18:05+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":25,"support_request":null,"confidence":65,"impact":35,"quick_win":26.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":39410,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1599","title":"fix(sources): detect local file source changes","author":"gcomneno","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/pull/1599","summary":"Adds change detection for local file sources in FileSourceHandler, fixing issue #1364. Has 2 unresolved review comments and some failing CI checks.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"The PR fixes a real bug (issue #1364) and the author claims to have addressed review feedback, but there are 2 unresolved review comments and CI has failing checks (test-common, lint/files, OSV-scanner). A maintainer review is needed to resolve the outstanding comments and assess the CI failures.","scores":{"impact":55,"quick_win":35.75,"staleness":75,"complexity":35,"confidence":65},"age_days":111,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-05-24T17:11:09+00:00","updated_at":"2026-05-27T09:21:25+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":35,"support_request":null,"confidence":65,"impact":55,"quick_win":35.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":39530,"project_name":"craft-artifacts","source":"github","external_id":"90","title":"ci: test on Python 3.14 and Ubuntu 26.04 (Resolute)","author":"lengau","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-artifacts/pull/90","summary":"Adds Python 3.14 and Ubuntu 26.04 (Resolute) CI testing. Approved by 1 reviewer but typecheck-with-ty CI check is failing and has been inactive for 91 days.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"The PR has been approved by one reviewer with no unresolved review comments, but the 'typecheck-with-ty' CI check is failing and has not been addressed for 91 days. A maintainer should decide whether to address the failing check or close the PR.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":21.25,"staleness":75,"complexity":15,"confidence":65},"age_days":101,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-06-03T16:35:45+00:00","updated_at":"2026-06-05T18:31:21+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":15,"support_request":null,"confidence":65,"impact":25,"quick_win":21.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":39537,"project_name":"snapcraft-rocks","source":"github","external_id":"113","title":"chore: update snapcraft to 8.14.5 and build pygit2 1.18","author":"cmatsuoka","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft-rocks/pull/113","summary":"Manual PR to update snapcraft to 8.14.5 and build pygit2 1.18 from source. Inactive 81 days with 2 unresolved review comments and failing build-rock CI on both architectures.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"This PR has been inactive for 81 days with 2 unresolved review comments and failing CI (build-rock on both arm64 and amd64). A related Renovate PR #105 exists for the same snapcraft 8.14.5 dependency update, suggesting this manual PR may be redundant or superseded.","scores":{"impact":55,"quick_win":30.25,"staleness":75,"complexity":45,"confidence":65},"age_days":89,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-06-15T16:52:18+00:00","updated_at":"2026-06-15T17:21:39+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":45,"support_request":null,"confidence":65,"impact":55,"quick_win":30.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":39766,"project_name":"craft-providers","source":"github","external_id":"950","title":"test: failing reproducer - no warning for default compatibility tag","author":"lengau","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-providers/pull/950","summary":"Adds a failing test reproducing issue #454: BuilddBase without custom compatibility_tag emits no warning, causing LXD DNS conflicts. Proposes adding a logger.warning in __init__.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"The PR adds a failing test for issue #454 (still open) and proposes a simple logger.warning fix in BuilddBase.__init__(). With 136 days of inactivity and 0 reviewer engagement, it needs maintainer attention to determine if the warning approach is acceptable or if a different solution is preferred.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":40.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":20,"confidence":65},"age_days":144,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-04-22T03:31:58+00:00","updated_at":"2026-04-22T03:31:58+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":20,"support_request":null,"confidence":65,"impact":50,"quick_win":40.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":39782,"project_name":"craft-providers","source":"github","external_id":"399","title":"Loading the instance config should be more robust","author":"mr-cal","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-providers/issues/399","summary":"Enhancement to make InstanceConfiguration loading more robust by allowing extra fields or handling validation failures gracefully. Untriaged, 1085 days old, 0 comments.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no maintainer comments, no assignee, and only the initial Type: Enhancement label after 1085 days. The referenced charmcraft issue #1258 was resolved by upgrading, not by fixing craft-providers. The code still has extra=\"forbid\" on InstanceConfiguration (line 58), so the issue remains technically valid but untriaged.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":22.5,"staleness":75,"complexity":25,"confidence":65,"support_request":0},"age_days":1093,"labels":["Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2023-09-15T12:32:33+00:00","updated_at":"2026-04-22T02:50:10+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":25,"support_request":0,"confidence":65,"impact":30,"quick_win":22.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":7165,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"4713","title":"Shared caches for deb and snap packages","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/4713","summary":"Feature request to add a shared cache for deb/snap packages (like Charmcraft's python cache) to avoid re-downloading artifacts across pack/clean/pack cycles. Open since 2022, last activity 536 days ago, no labels, only a bot Jira-sync comment.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is a maintainer-filed feature request with no labels, no assignee, and no human maintainer response — only an automated Jira-sync bot comment (CRAFT-2668) from 2024-04-04. No commit or PR in the repo implements a shared deb/snap cache (searches for 'shared cache' return nothing), and the existing docs only cover an external squid proxy workaround. It has not been triaged, so it should be categorised and prioritised rather than closed.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":13.5,"staleness":75,"complexity":70,"confidence":60,"support_request":10},"age_days":891,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-04-04T13:07:35+00:00","updated_at":"2025-03-13T18:36:51+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":70,"support_request":10,"confidence":60,"impact":45,"quick_win":13.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":1914,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2218","title":"Build cache invalidation misses direct URL dependency change","author":"dimaqq","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/2218","summary":"Charmcraft build cache invalidation misses direct URL dependency changes in requirements.txt, causing stale packages to be used. Unlabelled, no maintainer response, inactive for over a year.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is unlabelled with no maintainer response or comments, indicating it has not been triaged. The bug report is well-structured with clear reproduction steps showing that changing a direct URL dependency in requirements.txt does not trigger cache invalidation, resulting in stale package content being used in the build.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":20.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":60,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":551,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-03-11T04:14:04+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:17:54+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":60,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":50,"quick_win":20.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":46497,"project_name":"fetch-service","source":"github","external_id":"373","title":"Improve inspector license extraction","author":"cmatsuoka","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/fetch-service/issues/373","summary":"Feature request to improve license identifier extraction in Fetch Service to prevent SPDX degradation, false positives, and normalize names. Untriaged, 390 days since last activity.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no assignee, and no maintainer response beyond the author's own comment. Despite being authored by a maintainer (cmatsuoka), it hasn't been formally triaged or prioritized. The referenced issue fetch-service#323 is still open and tracks related SPDX compliance work.","scores":{"impact":60,"quick_win":27.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":55,"confidence":65,"support_request":5},"age_days":530,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-03-31T12:31:57+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:15:37+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":55,"support_request":5,"confidence":65,"impact":60,"quick_win":27.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":46466,"project_name":"fetch-service","source":"github","external_id":"419","title":"Missing inspectors for JARs (Maven)","author":"Vyom-Yadav","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/fetch-service/issues/419","summary":"Missing inspectors for JARs (Maven) causing artifact inspection failures; PR #180 merged a JAR inspector but mimetype application/java-archive remains missing from mimetypes.go","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"PR #180 (merged) added a Maven JAR inspector that resolves the core issue of unrecognized JAR files. The remaining concern about `application/java-archive` not being in `mimetypes.go` is a separate, lower-priority concern that should be tracked separately if still relevant. The issue has been inactive for 292 days.","scores":{"impact":60,"quick_win":36.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":40,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":417,"labels":["Type: Bug","Status: Triaged"],"created_at":"2025-07-23T06:58:51+00:00","updated_at":"2025-11-21T11:04:19+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":60,"quick_win":36.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":46505,"project_name":"fetch-service","source":"github","external_id":"381","title":"Incorrect metadata for `application/x.go.module.git-repo` (parsing `go.mod`)","author":"Vyom-Yadav","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/fetch-service/issues/381","summary":"Go module git-repo metadata parsing bug: manual go.mod parsing produces incorrect name/vendor fields. Issue is 510 days old with no maintainer triage or labels.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no maintainer response (only an auto-generated Jira sync comment), and no assignee after 510 days. The bug is valid—the code at inspectors/gomod/go_module_git.go lines 184-217 uses naive string matching to parse go.mod instead of golang.org/x/mod/modfile, causing incorrect name/vendor extraction (e.g., splitting module path into vendor/name instead of using the full module path as the name).","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":40,"confidence":70,"support_request":15},"age_days":513,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-04-18T09:11:33+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:15:31+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":40,"support_request":15,"confidence":70,"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":22028,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1057","title":"docs: add examples to the source field in docs","author":"alesancor1","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/pull/1057","summary":"Adds examples to the source field in documentation. Reviewer requested changes but PR has been inactive for 524 days with no follow-up.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"PR is a small documentation change (+29/-1 lines) that a reviewer has already engaged with (changes_requested status), but the author has not responded in 524 days. The change is not irrelevant — it adds valid documentation examples — so it should remain open for the author to address review comments when possible.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":10,"confidence":65},"age_days":528,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-04-02T10:35:43+00:00","updated_at":"2026-09-08T17:53:48+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":10,"support_request":null,"confidence":65,"impact":20,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":22111,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"974","title":"Python plugins install wheels for the host architecture, not the target architecture.","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/974","summary":"Python plugins (python, poetry, uv) create venvs and pip-install wheels for the host architecture, so cross-compiling a snap with binary Python packages (e.g. cryptography) silently produces a broken snap. Open, unlabelled, no comments, inactive ~16 months; bug still present in current code.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"Filed by a maintainer (lengau) but has no labels, no comments, and no assignee, so it was never triaged. I verified the bug is still live: python_plugin.py's _get_package_install_commands() runs plain `pip install` with no --platform/--target-arch handling, and BasePythonPlugin._get_create_venv_commands() in base.py still creates the venv from the host python3. The fix is non-trivial (cross-arch wheel fetching for all BasePythonPlugin subclasses), so it needs maintainer scoping rather than closure.","scores":{"impact":55,"quick_win":16.5,"staleness":75,"complexity":70,"confidence":70,"support_request":5},"age_days":605,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-01-15T18:18:38+00:00","updated_at":"2025-03-11T14:28:20+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":70,"support_request":5,"confidence":70,"impact":55,"quick_win":16.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":22246,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"839","title":"Spread tests for documentation examples","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/839","summary":"Feature request to add spread tests for documentation examples (like Rockcraft has). Open 721 days, no labels/assignee/comments, last activity 538 days ago. Pytest ignores tests/spread but no spread tests exist yet.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"Created by a maintainer but has no labels, assignee, or comments in 2 years. The pytest config references tests/spread (commit 8e78354b) but no spread tests exist in the repo. Needs someone to either prioritize and assign or close as low-priority. The related charmcraft#1962 is similarly stalled.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":40,"confidence":70,"support_request":0},"age_days":733,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-09-09T14:07:31+00:00","updated_at":"2025-03-11T14:28:52+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":40,"support_request":0,"confidence":70,"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":22263,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"822","title":"[Python plugin]: Consider including a rust compiler by default","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/822","summary":"Feature request to add a rust compiler to the python plugin's default build dependencies, since many Python apps have rust deps. No labels, no comments, no activity for ~18 months; a similar request in charmcraft was rejected.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has had zero comments, no labels, and no activity for ~18 months, and the python plugin still only installs pip/setuptools/wheel. The same request was explicitly rejected in canonical/charmcraft#2004, citing a strategic shift toward explicit, minimal build configurations to avoid version conflicts across OS bases, so the proposal is no longer aligned with project direction.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":16.5,"staleness":75,"complexity":45,"confidence":65,"support_request":10},"age_days":753,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-08-20T20:04:25+00:00","updated_at":"2025-03-11T14:28:56+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":45,"support_request":10,"confidence":65,"impact":30,"quick_win":16.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":22429,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"655","title":"\"Architecture not supported\" error in a armhf container on arm64 host","author":"Saviq","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/655","summary":"Snapcraft crashes with InvalidArchitecture 'armv8l' when run in an armhf container on an arm64 host. The bug is in craft-parts' architecture mapping. Fixed in craft-parts PR #697 which added armv8l to the platform machine variations map.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The underlying bug has been fixed in craft-parts PR #697 (commit 83679d41 'feat(info): support armv8l'), which added 'armv8l' to _PLATFORM_MACHINE_VARIATIONS mapping it to 'armv7l'. The current code in craft_parts/infos.py confirms armv8l is now properly handled. The issue is 935 days old with last activity 362 days ago, and the fix has been merged upstream, making this issue no longer applicable.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":37.5,"staleness":75,"complexity":25,"confidence":82,"support_request":5},"age_days":947,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2024-02-08T12:23:52+00:00","updated_at":"2025-09-03T20:42:06+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":25,"support_request":5,"confidence":82,"impact":50,"quick_win":37.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":2632,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"1496","title":"Re-enable CentOS and alma tests","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/1496","summary":"Task to re-enable disabled almalinux and CentOS spread tests in charmcraft, blocked on a craft-providers fix and a CentOS image source; last touched 381 days ago with no resolution.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is a legitimate internal task (not a support request) that was triaged by maintainer lengau, who noted #1824 should fix alma but a CentOS image source is still missing. It is blocked on external dependencies (craft-providers#502 and image availability), so it should remain open rather than closed as stale, though it has been inactive for over a year.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":21.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":40,"confidence":70,"support_request":0},"age_days":956,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-01-30T16:00:07+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:18:13+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":40,"support_request":0,"confidence":70,"impact":35,"quick_win":21.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":2010,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2119","title":"Configure spread tests on noble","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/2119","summary":"Task to configure spread tests on Ubuntu 24.04 (noble); the Google backend lacked 24.04. The Google backend has since been removed and spread now runs 24.04 via openstack, so the request is fulfilled. No maintainer triage; only a bot comment.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is inactive (last activity 381 days ago, only an auto-generated Jira-sync bot comment, no labels or maintainer response) and the requested work is done: the current spread.yaml no longer contains a Google backend and explicitly lists ubuntu-24.04-64 as a system on the openstack and openstack-dev backends, added via commits like 'ci: split spread tests by system (#2301)' and 'ci: use openstack for spread (#2783)'. The original problem is no longer applicable.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":24.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":20,"confidence":85,"support_request":0},"age_days":593,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-01-27T17:16:28+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:17:39+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":20,"support_request":0,"confidence":85,"impact":30,"quick_win":24.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":11907,"project_name":"debcraft","source":"github","external_id":"92","title":"Add a short form for platform `all`","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/debcraft/issues/92","summary":"Feature request to accept a platform named 'all' in debcraft.yaml, meaning build on any architecture and build for the current architecture. No maintainer response, labels, or code changes yet; unimplemented.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue was filed by a maintainer (lengau) 179 days ago with zero comments, no labels, and no assignee, showing no triage has occurred. The code in debcraft/models/project.py and services/project.py still only supports valid Debian architecture names as short forms, with no 'all' handling. The feature is a small but real QoL improvement for arch-independent packages, but it touches platform rendering logic and schema validation, so it needs a maintainer to scope and prioritize it.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":75,"complexity":40,"confidence":80,"support_request":0},"age_days":191,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-03-05T18:12:36+00:00","updated_at":"2026-03-05T18:12:36+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":75,"complexity":40,"support_request":0,"confidence":80,"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":15650,"project_name":"snapcraft-rocks","source":"github","external_id":"60","title":"Set `WORKDIR /workdir` on Docker level","author":"abitrolly","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft-rocks/issues/60","summary":"Feature request to change Docker WORKDIR from /project to /workdir for convention consistency. Maintainer expressed skepticism; Dockerfile since removed from this repo and moved to snapcraft-rocks. No activity in ~2 years.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The Dockerfile was removed from this repo in commit 24e70d6db (PR #5063) and moved to the snapcraft-rocks project, making this issue no longer actionable here. Maintainer tigarmo expressed skepticism ('I don't see much reason to change what we use currently'), and the current docker/README.md still uses /project as the mount point. No activity in ~2 years.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":12.0,"staleness":72,"complexity":20,"confidence":75,"support_request":30},"age_days":718,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-09-24T16:18:53+00:00","updated_at":"2024-10-03T04:15:59+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":72,"complexity":20,"support_request":30,"confidence":75,"impact":15,"quick_win":12.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":6604,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"5275","title":"docs: update build-environment for the kde-neon and kde-neon-6 extensions","author":"mr-cal","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/5275","summary":"Docs task to split kde-neon and kde-neon-6 build-environment sections into core22/core24 subsections. Triaged by maintainer 557 days ago; docs still show only core24 values, so the work remains unaddressed.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue was triaged by maintainer mr-cal and the underlying code (kde_neon_6.py) still branches on base to select different SDK snaps, so the docs gap is real. However, no activity in ~17 months and the only comment is a Jira-sync bot, so it has been deprioritised.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":20.5,"staleness":72,"complexity":18,"confidence":78,"support_request":5},"age_days":569,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Documentation"],"created_at":"2025-02-20T17:53:46+00:00","updated_at":"2025-04-02T13:20:16+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":72,"complexity":18,"support_request":5,"confidence":78,"impact":25,"quick_win":20.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":28122,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1890046","title":"Handle SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH for SquashFS","author":"~abitrolly","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1890046","summary":"Feature request to respect SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH when creating the SquashFS inside .snap archives for reproducible builds; open since 2020, unlabelled, no maintainer interaction.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is unlabelled with 0 comments and no maintainer acknowledgement (confirmed by the related-issue lookup: 'Currently unlabelled and unacknowledged by maintainers'), so it has not been assessed. It is a legitimate feature request (reproducible builds), not a support question, and the concern is still relevant, so it should be triaged rather than closed. Confidence is moderate because I could not inspect the current snapcraft source to confirm whether SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH handling has since been added.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":20.0,"staleness":72,"complexity":50,"confidence":55,"support_request":15},"age_days":2232,"labels":[],"created_at":"2020-08-02T15:32:17.736022+00:00","updated_at":"2025-11-22T05:41:10.035632+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":72,"complexity":50,"support_request":15,"confidence":55,"impact":40,"quick_win":20.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":4874,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"801","title":"test(spread): mark doc tests as manual","author":"tigarmo","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/pull/801","summary":"Marks doc spread tests as manual so they don't run on every code change. Pending review, 0 comments, no CI. Docs tests now run via a separate conditional workflow (spread-docs.yaml) on a weekly schedule and only when docs code changes.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"The PR (577 days old, last activity 381 days ago, 0 comments, pending review) aims to mark doc spread tests as manual to avoid running them on every code change. However, the current repo already has a separate .github/workflows/spread-docs.yaml that runs docs spread tests conditionally (on a weekly cron and only when docs/**/code/** changes), and the docs suites in spread.yaml are not marked manual. This suggests the goal may have been achieved via a different mechanism, so a maintainer should confirm whether this PR is still needed or superseded before merging or closing.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":22.5,"staleness":72,"complexity":25,"confidence":55},"age_days":589,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-01-31T19:08:17+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:12:53+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":72,"complexity":25,"support_request":null,"confidence":55,"impact":30,"quick_win":22.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":1633,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2505","title":"fix: fetch-lib error message showing \"Library None not found\"","author":"Copilot","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/pull/2505","summary":"Fixes 'Library None not found' error in deprecated fetch-lib command by using lib_data.full_name. Approved but 2 unresolved review comments, many CI failures, 266 days inactive. Bug still present in main.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"The PR has 2 unresolved review comments and the maintainer's last comment (2025-12-08) was 'your work is incomplete. Run the tests before you commit!' with many CI checks still failing. Additionally, the fetch-lib command is now deprecated (commit b93737a1, #2691 added deprecation warnings to all charmlibs commands), so maintainers need to decide whether a cosmetic error-message fix for a deprecated command is worth merging or if the PR should be closed.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":12.75,"staleness":72,"complexity":15,"confidence":72},"age_days":283,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-12-03T19:20:39+00:00","updated_at":"2025-12-08T21:52:59+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":true,"staleness":72,"complexity":15,"support_request":null,"confidence":72,"impact":15,"quick_win":12.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":6810,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"5069","title":"Test with snapd on candidate or edge","author":"mr-cal","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/5069","summary":"Enhancement to add a weekly spread smoke test running snapcraft against snapd on candidate or edge channel to catch integration bugs earlier. Triaged and tracked in Jira (CRAFT-3488) but no implementation found in the repo; dormant for ~14 months.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue carries explicit triage labels (Status: Triaged, Type: Enhancement) and was filed by a maintainer, so it has been assessed. No implementation of a weekly snapd candidate/edge smoke test exists in the repo (no snapd/edge or snapd/candidate channel refresh in any workflow or spread task), so the request remains valid and not outdated. Inactivity alone (~14 months) is insufficient to close a triaged, unimplemented enhancement.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":20.0,"staleness":72,"complexity":50,"confidence":78,"support_request":0},"age_days":716,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2024-09-26T19:39:14+00:00","updated_at":"2025-06-25T22:11:54+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":72,"complexity":50,"support_request":0,"confidence":78,"impact":40,"quick_win":20.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":4151,"project_name":"imagecraft","source":"github","external_id":"316","title":"chore: POC for a lxd provider with a losetup server on the host","author":"lengau","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/imagecraft/pull/316","summary":"POC adding an LXD provider using a losetup server on the host (+2748/-124, 28 files). Open 147 days with no activity for 139 days; a maintainer question about grub-install in the container went unanswered and several CI checks fail.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The PR is a POC inactive for ~4.6 months (last activity 139 days ago), and maintainer mwhudson's 2026-04-14 question about whether grub-install works in the container (suggesting security.syscalls.intercept. config is needed) has gone unanswered for over 3 months, indicating the approach is stalled. The underlying feature request (canonical/imagecraft#253) remains open, so the work can be revisited in a fresh PR if the grub-install blocker is solved.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":12.5,"staleness":72,"complexity":75,"confidence":68},"age_days":159,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-04-06T14:50:48+00:00","updated_at":"2026-04-14T05:48:54+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":72,"complexity":75,"support_request":null,"confidence":68,"impact":50,"quick_win":12.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":22355,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"730","title":"Remove base support","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/730","summary":"Task to remove the deprecated 'base' parameter from LifecycleManager and related base support. The parameter still exists in current code (lifecycle_manager.py, infos.py, main.py), so the work is unaddressed; no labels or maintainer activity beyond an auto Jira-sync comment.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no assignee, and the only comment is the auto-generated Jira sync bot (CRAFT-2915) — no maintainer has acknowledged, categorised, or prioritised it. The requested removal is still valid: the deprecated 'base' parameter remains in lifecycle_manager.py:110, infos.py:433 ('# base usage is deprecated'), and main.py:118, with no commit having removed it, so it should be triaged rather than closed.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":12.5,"staleness":72,"complexity":50,"confidence":82,"support_request":0},"age_days":850,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-05-15T14:45:28+00:00","updated_at":"2025-03-11T14:29:01+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":72,"complexity":50,"support_request":0,"confidence":82,"impact":25,"quick_win":12.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":12731,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"342","title":"Utility to allow a `format` option for commands.","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/issues/342","summary":"Feature request from maintainer lengau to add a unified format option utility (add_format_argument, emit_formatted_output) for tabular command outputs. No labels, no implementation found in codebase, last activity was a bot Jira ticket 465 days ago.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no assignee, and no maintainer response beyond the automated Jira bot comment from 2024-05-09. No implementation of add_format_argument, emit_formatted_output, or tabulate integration exists in the current codebase. It is a valid, well-scoped feature request that simply has not been categorised or prioritised by a maintainer.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":19.25,"staleness":72,"complexity":45,"confidence":78,"support_request":0},"age_days":856,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-05-09T17:47:25+00:00","updated_at":"2025-05-23T17:26:53+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":72,"complexity":45,"support_request":0,"confidence":78,"impact":35,"quick_win":19.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":22845,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"237","title":"Allow disabling common-directory removal code in tar source","author":"zyga","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/237","summary":"Feature request to add an option (e.g. source-strip-path) to control or disable the automatic stripping of the common top-level directory when extracting tar sources. No maintainer response; only a bot created an internal ticket. Stripping behavior still present in current code.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no assignee, and its only comment is the syncronize-issues-to-jira bot (2024-05-17) creating internal ticket CRAFT-2968 — no maintainer has acknowledged, categorised, or prioritised it. The requested behaviour is still unimplemented: tar_source.py's filter_members() still unconditionally strips the common prefix, and no commit or related issue implements a source-strip-path option, so it remains a valid, actionable feature request awaiting triage.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":15.0,"staleness":72,"complexity":40,"confidence":80,"support_request":10},"age_days":1544,"labels":[],"created_at":"2022-06-21T18:23:06+00:00","updated_at":"2025-03-11T14:29:22+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":72,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":80,"impact":25,"quick_win":15.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":2531,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"1598","title":"Linter to warn if the summary field is over 78 characters","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/1598","summary":"Feature request to add a linter warning when charm summary exceeds 78 chars. Unimplemented; summary limit is currently 200 chars in project.py with a comment referencing this issue. No maintainer response beyond a bot Jira ticket sync. Last activity 381 days ago.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue was filed by a maintainer (lengau) and synced to Jira (CRAFT-2599) but has no labels, no assignee, and no substantive maintainer discussion. The code comment in project.py (line 65) explicitly references this issue (#1598) and notes the 78-char limit is a future goal, confirming the feature is still unimplemented. However, with no activity in ~13 months and no triage labels, it needs a maintainer to decide whether to prioritize or defer it.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":26.25,"staleness":72,"complexity":25,"confidence":78,"support_request":0},"age_days":914,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-03-12T15:04:11+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:18:07+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":72,"complexity":25,"support_request":0,"confidence":78,"impact":35,"quick_win":26.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":4767,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"908","title":"Add `sha256` prefix to the `org.opencontainers.image.base.digest` annotations field in the image manifest.","author":"moaazassali","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/908","summary":"Request to add sha256: prefix to org.opencontainers.image.base.digest annotation and base-digest in metadata.yaml for consistency with other digest fields. Code at project.py:441 still uses base_digest.hex() without prefix. No labels, no maintainer response in 431 days.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is well-scoped and the code at rockcraft/models/project.py:441 still uses base_digest.hex() without the sha256: prefix, confirming it remains unfixed. However, there are no labels, no maintainer comments, and no assignee after 431 days, indicating it has never been triaged. The fix is straightforward (prefix the hex with 'sha256:') but may warrant a backward-compatibility discussion since consumers may parse the annotation expecting bare hex.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":18.75,"staleness":72,"complexity":25,"confidence":78,"support_request":5},"age_days":443,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-06-26T13:34:33+00:00","updated_at":"2025-07-08T08:07:20+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":72,"complexity":25,"support_request":5,"confidence":78,"impact":25,"quick_win":18.75,"has_related_links":false},{"id":12360,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"713","title":"Add an issues page field to the base application","author":"bepri","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/issues/713","summary":"Feature request to add a mandatory issues_page field to the base application class for use in error messages, enabling apps to direct users to their bug-report platform. Unimplemented, no labels, no comments, last activity 465 days ago.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue was filed by a maintainer (bepri) as a feature request spawned from PR #701 discussion, but has no labels, no comments, and no assignee. The codebase confirms no issues_page field exists in AppMetadata (only docs_url), so the feature is unimplemented. It needs triage to determine priority and scope.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":24.5,"staleness":72,"complexity":30,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":533,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-03-29T00:09:41+00:00","updated_at":"2025-05-23T17:26:30+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":72,"complexity":30,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":35,"quick_win":24.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":2177,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"1952","title":"Fix docs and help messages about OCI image uploads","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/1952","summary":"Docs and help messages for OCI image uploads in Charmcraft 3 are slightly wrong per a discourse thread. Filed by maintainer lengau, no labels or assignee, only an auto Jira-sync comment. Docs still reference dockerd while code now uses skopeo.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"No labels, no assignee, and the only comment is the auto-generated Jira sync bot (CRAFT-3563). Although filed by maintainer lengau, no other maintainer has acknowledged or picked it up in 691 days. The docs in manage-resources.rst still say 'needs dockerd to be installed and running' while the code (commit fb8680ec) now uses skopeo, confirming the issue is valid but unaddressed.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":13.5,"staleness":72,"complexity":10,"confidence":62,"support_request":0},"age_days":703,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-10-09T20:57:13+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:18:08+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":72,"complexity":10,"support_request":0,"confidence":62,"impact":15,"quick_win":13.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":5120,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"555","title":"Emit a warning to stdout when `$CRAFT_PART_INSTALL` is empty after `override-build`","author":"sed-i","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/555","summary":"Feature request to warn when $CRAFT_PART_INSTALL is empty after override-build, helping beginners troubleshoot. No labels, no maintainer response, only an auto-generated Jira sync comment. 864 days old, last activity 381 days ago.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no assignee, and no maintainer response — the only comment is an automated Jira sync bot (CRAFT-2830) from 2024-04-19. While the feature request (warn on empty $CRAFT_PART_INSTALL after override-build) is still valid and unimplemented, it has sat untriaged for over 2 years with zero maintainer engagement, so it needs a human to assess priority and scope.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":21.0,"staleness":72,"complexity":30,"confidence":65,"support_request":10},"age_days":877,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-04-19T04:20:17+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:12:45+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":72,"complexity":30,"support_request":10,"confidence":65,"impact":30,"quick_win":21.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":21757,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1328","title":"Clean up return of `install_packages`","author":"bepri","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/1328","summary":"Maintainer cleanup task: make install_packages return None since its return value is unused. Spawned by a TODO in yum.py. No labels, no comments, no activity in 342 days. The referenced TODO comment is no longer in the code, but install_packages still returns list[str] in yum.py, base.py, and deb.py, so the change is not yet done.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"This is a valid, well-scoped maintainer cleanup task (bepri) with a concrete premise: callers in executor.py:300 and part_handler.py:382/386 ignore the return value, yet install_packages still returns list[str] in yum.py, base.py, and deb.py. It is not stale-dead because the underlying code still exhibits the described behavior and the fix is small and self-contained; however it has had zero maintainer interaction and no labels for 342 days, so it needs triage/assignment rather than closure. Confidence is moderate because the referenced TODO comment no longer appears in yum.py, so I could not confirm the exact original wording or whether a partial cleanup already landed.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":13.0,"staleness":72,"complexity":35,"confidence":62,"support_request":0},"age_days":354,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-09-23T15:30:23+00:00","updated_at":"2025-09-23T15:30:26+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":72,"complexity":35,"support_request":0,"confidence":62,"impact":20,"quick_win":13.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":21896,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1189","title":"Add ability to handle Internet connection failures","author":"ofry","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/1189","summary":"Feature request to add a retry option for failed network downloads (e.g. unexpected EOF on unstable connections). Unlabelled, 0 comments, no maintainer response; related snapcraft#5642 was closed and redirected here as the proper home.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no assignee, and zero comments, showing no maintainer has assessed it, so it needs triage. It is not stale-irrelevant: the referenced snapcraft#5642 was explicitly closed and redirected to craft-parts as the correct home, and no retry logic exists in the download path (url_utils.download_request just iterates content with no retry).","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":72,"complexity":60,"confidence":78,"support_request":15},"age_days":414,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-07-25T14:28:43+00:00","updated_at":"2025-07-25T14:28:43+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":72,"complexity":60,"support_request":15,"confidence":78,"impact":45,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":2471,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"1658","title":"`login` command should validate channel names as full channel names","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/1658","summary":"charmcraft login --channel should validate that channel names are full names (e.g. latest/edge) since Charmhub requires them for permission attenuation. Unlabeled, no maintainer activity since a 2024 bot comment; code still lacks the validation.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Verified at pinned HEAD that LoginCommand.run() in charmcraft/application/commands/store.py still forwards parsed_args.channel to store.get_credentials()/login() with no full-channel-name validation, so the request remains applicable rather than obsolete. The author is a maintainer (lengau) who filed it as a scoped task and it complements open issue #1657, so it warrants keeping open despite 381 days of inactivity and the only comment being the 2024-04-18 Jira-sync bot message.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":18.75,"staleness":72,"complexity":25,"confidence":75,"support_request":0},"age_days":877,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-04-18T15:05:58+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:18:02+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":72,"complexity":25,"support_request":0,"confidence":75,"impact":25,"quick_win":18.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":21803,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1282","title":"dotnet-v2 plugin integration tests fail on arm64","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/1282","summary":"dotnet v2 plugin integration tests fail on arm64 with 'Exec format error' because the dotnet-deps part stages an x64 SDK binary. Filed by a maintainer 356 days ago with no comments or labels beyond Type: Bug. The test file and parts.yaml have since been modified by later commits.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue was filed by a maintainer (lengau) 356 days ago with zero comments and no maintainer acknowledgement beyond the initial filing. The root cause is clear from the log: the dotnet-deps part stages an x64 dotnet SDK binary that cannot execute on arm64 ('Exec format error', exit code 126). The test file test_dotnet_v2.py has since been touched by commits #1404 and #1424, and parts.yaml by #1311, but there is no evidence the arm64-specific failure was addressed. The issue needs triage to determine whether the arm64 CI path now works or whether the test fixture still needs an architecture-aware SDK download.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":21.0,"staleness":72,"complexity":40,"confidence":55,"support_request":5},"age_days":368,"labels":["Type: Bug"],"created_at":"2025-09-10T04:42:11+00:00","updated_at":"2025-09-10T04:43:55+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":72,"complexity":40,"support_request":5,"confidence":55,"impact":35,"quick_win":21.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":1570,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2572","title":"feature: collaborator management commands","author":"niwamo","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/pull/2572","summary":"Adds Charmhub collaborator management commands (214 lines, 3 files). Pending review with 0 reviewers, 8 CI checks failing (incl. conventional-commits title, typecheck, snap-tests). No maintainer interaction in 197 days. Auth system since migrated to Ubuntu One (#2760), likely requiring rework.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"The PR is 197 days old with zero maintainer engagement and 8 failing CI checks including the conventional-commits title policy and typecheck-with-ty. More critically, the repo merged a breaking auth migration (feat!: migrate from candid to Ubuntu One auth, #2760) after this PR was written, which likely requires rework of the store API interaction layer. The feature is not implemented elsewhere (no collaborator commands exist in current main), so it remains relevant but needs a maintainer to assess viability and request updates from the author.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":24.75,"staleness":72,"complexity":45,"confidence":62},"age_days":213,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-02-11T22:50:20+00:00","updated_at":"2026-02-11T22:54:04+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":72,"complexity":45,"support_request":null,"confidence":62,"impact":45,"quick_win":24.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":1792,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2341","title":"Packing a bundle produces a zip that is rejected by charmhub","author":"sed-i","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/2341","summary":"charmcraft 3.x pack produces a bundle zip with metadata.yaml instead of bundle.yaml, so charmcraft upload is rejected by charmhub. A maintainer asked for the charmcraft.yaml on 2025-06-27; no further activity since.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"A maintainer (lengau) actively triaged on 2025-06-27, asking for the charmcraft.yaml to understand why bundle.yaml is omitted, so the issue is acknowledged and awaiting the reporter's reply. The reporter's follow-up that charmcraft 2.x produces an accepted zip with bundle.yaml confirms a real regression in 3.x packing, not a usage error. It should stay open pending that information.","scores":{"impact":55,"quick_win":30.25,"staleness":72,"complexity":45,"confidence":60,"support_request":15},"age_days":449,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-06-20T18:42:44+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:17:47+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":72,"complexity":45,"support_request":15,"confidence":60,"impact":55,"quick_win":30.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":2358,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"1771","title":"Determine whether requiring `libyaml-devel` on yum-based systems creates working charms","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/1771","summary":"Task to verify if adding libyaml-devel to yum-based charm build deps produces working charms, mirroring the apt-side change in #1766. Unaddressed for ~2 years; almalinux spread tests were later disabled, complicating verification.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"Created by maintainer lengau with a good-first-issue label but has 0 comments and no activity for 381 days. The referenced apt-side PR #1766 was merged, yet the yum counterpart was never added to get_build_packages in _charm.py. A later commit disabled almalinux spread tests, which may make the proposed verification infeasible; a maintainer should reassess whether this is still actionable or should be closed.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":22.75,"staleness":72,"complexity":35,"confidence":72,"support_request":5},"age_days":774,"labels":["good first issue"],"created_at":"2024-07-30T23:40:43+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:17:57+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":72,"complexity":35,"support_request":5,"confidence":72,"impact":35,"quick_win":22.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":6189,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"5697","title":"Explain how to use local GPG keys for a repository","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/5697","summary":"Docs enhancement: package-repositories reference page links to craft-archives but doesn't explain local GPG keyring format or storage location. Triaged, no activity in ~12.7 months, gap still present in docs.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is triaged (Status: Triaged, Type: Enhancement, Type: Documentation labels) and the referenced page docs/reference/package-repositories.rst still only links to craft-archives docs without explaining the keyring format or location, so the gap persists. It's a low-complexity documentation task that remains valid despite inactivity.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":21.25,"staleness":72,"complexity":15,"confidence":78,"support_request":5},"age_days":395,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Enhancement","Type: Documentation"],"created_at":"2025-08-14T01:29:35+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-14T01:30:05+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":72,"complexity":15,"support_request":5,"confidence":78,"impact":25,"quick_win":21.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":1637,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2501","title":"Fix uv plugin not caching wheels to LXC host","author":"Copilot","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/pull/2501","summary":"Adds UV_CACHE_DIR to UV plugin build env to cache source-built wheels on LXC host, with unit and spread tests. 268 days old, 0 reviewers, several CI checks failing (snap-tests, macos-13, Conventional Commits).","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"The PR has been inactive for ~9 months with no maintainer review (0 reviewers), but the underlying issue #2461 remains open and the fix is still relevant. Several CI checks are failing (snap-tests on ubuntu-20.04/22.04, macos-13, Conventional Commits policy) that need a maintainer to triage — the ty type-check failures are explicitly noted as pre-existing and not requiring action. A maintainer needs to review the diff, confirm the CI failures are not PR-introduced, and address the Conventional Commits policy check before this can be merged.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":29.25,"staleness":72,"complexity":35,"confidence":65},"age_days":283,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-12-03T18:32:58+00:00","updated_at":"2025-12-08T21:21:31+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":true,"staleness":72,"complexity":35,"support_request":null,"confidence":65,"impact":45,"quick_win":29.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":12726,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"347","title":"Improve platform validation error message","author":"cmatsuoka","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/issues/347","summary":"Request to improve the cryptic pydantic validation error shown when platforms/build-on is malformed in a craft project file. No maintainer response or labels; only an auto Jira-sync comment. Current code already converts pydantic errors via CraftValidationError.from_pydantic, so the raw message may be outdated.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"No maintainer has acknowledged, labelled, or responded to this issue — the only comment is the autogenerated Jira-sync bot (CRAFT-2919). The reported raw 'wheelcraft internal error: ValidationError(...)' message may no longer be reproducible because craft_application/models/base.py now wraps pydantic.ValidationError in CraftValidationError.from_pydantic with formatted output, so a maintainer should verify current behaviour before deciding whether this is still actionable.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":26.0,"staleness":72,"complexity":35,"confidence":60,"support_request":10},"age_days":850,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-05-16T08:45:41+00:00","updated_at":"2025-05-23T17:26:52+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":72,"complexity":35,"support_request":10,"confidence":60,"impact":40,"quick_win":26.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":7308,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"4569","title":"pkg-config based project don't work with kde-neon extension","author":"chubinou","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/4569","summary":"kde-neon extension no longer sets PKG_CONFIG_PATH after PR #4242, so pkg-config-based builds can't find Qt5 .pc files from the kde-neon-sdk snap. No maintainer response, no labels, 0 comments, last activity 536 days ago.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no assignee, and zero maintainer comments — it shows no sign of having been triaged. The bug is real and well-documented: PR #4242 (commit cfacbc54b) removed PKG_CONFIG_PATH from the kde-neon extension, and the .pc files in the kde-neon-sdk snap have incorrect prefixes (pointing to /build/snapcraft-.../stage/usr instead of /snap/kf5-...-sdk/current/usr), so even restoring PKG_CONFIG_PATH would not fully fix the problem. The root cause is in the SDK snap packaging, not snapcraft itself, which adds complexity. The issue is 936 days old with no activity in 536 days, but the kde-neon extension is still actively maintained (kde-neon-6 added, core24 support), so it is not clearly obsolete.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":26.0,"staleness":72,"complexity":35,"confidence":60,"support_request":5},"age_days":948,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-02-07T13:13:21+00:00","updated_at":"2025-03-13T18:36:55+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":72,"complexity":35,"support_request":5,"confidence":60,"impact":40,"quick_win":26.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":13462,"project_name":"craft-cli","source":"github","external_id":"278","title":"Support output formats","author":"mr-cal","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-cli/issues/278","summary":"Feature request to add an API for outputting command data as a table or machine-readable format (e.g. JSON) to reduce duplication across craft apps. Unlabelled, no assignee, only a Jira-sync bot comment; the requested data-output API is not implemented (OutputFormat only covers help text).","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no assignee, and its only comment is an autogenerated Jira-sync bot message (2024-09-30), so it shows no sign of being categorised or prioritised despite being filed by maintainer mr-cal. It is a legitimate, still-open feature (craft_cli/helptexts.py defines OutputFormat as only 'plain markdown' for help text, with no table/JSON data-output API) and is a stated blocker for canonical/snapcraft#5060, so it should be triaged rather than closed.","scores":{"impact":55,"quick_win":13.75,"staleness":72,"complexity":75,"confidence":75,"support_request":5},"age_days":712,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-09-30T15:19:29+00:00","updated_at":"2025-03-10T18:59:08+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":72,"complexity":75,"support_request":5,"confidence":75,"impact":55,"quick_win":13.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":13478,"project_name":"craft-cli","source":"github","external_id":"262","title":"Always report error messages for incorrect usage","author":"mattculler","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-cli/issues/262","summary":"CLI prints full help text instead of an error when invoked with no command; partially addressed by #422 which errors when a default command is disallowed, but the no-default-command case still dumps help text. Unlabelled, no maintainer response.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is unlabelled with no maintainer acknowledgement (only a Jira-sync bot comment). The core complaint is still valid: when no default command is configured, pre_parse_args() still raises ArgumentParsingError with full help text (dispatcher.py: 'help_text = self._get_general_help(detailed=False); raise ArgumentParsingError(help_text)'). PR #422 added a proper 'Missing a command' error but only for the allow_default_command=False path, leaving the no-default-command case unchanged. A maintainer needs to decide whether to change the remaining case.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":28.0,"staleness":72,"complexity":30,"confidence":75,"support_request":5},"age_days":789,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-07-15T18:18:15+00:00","updated_at":"2025-03-10T18:59:09+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":72,"complexity":30,"support_request":5,"confidence":75,"impact":40,"quick_win":28.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":4684,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"991","title":"Provide instructions on authentication using Skopeo when publishing rock","author":"sinapah","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/991","summary":"Doc enhancement request to add a skopeo --dest-creds authentication section to the publish-a-rock how-to. 329 days old, 0 comments, no maintainer interaction; author promised a PR that never landed. The doc gap still exists.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The doc gap is real and still present (current docs/how-to/crafting/publish-a-rock.rst has no auth section and no 'dest-creds' appears anywhere in the repo), but there is zero maintainer engagement: 0 comments, no assignee, and the author's promised PR never arrived in ~11 months. A maintainer needs to decide whether to pick it up or ask the author to follow through; it is not stale-irrelevant since the request is still applicable.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":22.5,"staleness":72,"complexity":10,"confidence":78,"support_request":10},"age_days":341,"labels":["Type: Documentation"],"created_at":"2025-10-06T13:47:47+00:00","updated_at":"2025-10-07T20:13:16+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":72,"complexity":10,"support_request":10,"confidence":78,"impact":25,"quick_win":22.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":6741,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"5138","title":"Feature request to formally support importing private keys","author":"CharleeSF","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/5138","summary":"Feature request to support importing private snapcraft keys for CI signing without login. Maintainers raised security concerns; reporter asked for recommended setup guidance but received no further response. No labels, no resolution.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainers @tonyespy and @mr-cal engaged with security concerns about private key import/export and @mr-cal mentioned considering a configure hook to create ~/.snap/gnupg/, but the reporter's follow-up question about the recommended setup went unanswered. The CI signing use case remains valid and the issue was triaged, so it should stay open pending a decision on the configure hook approach.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":15.75,"staleness":72,"complexity":55,"confidence":72,"support_request":25},"age_days":676,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-11-05T10:30:34+00:00","updated_at":"2024-11-25T14:41:35+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":72,"complexity":55,"support_request":25,"confidence":72,"impact":35,"quick_win":15.75,"has_related_links":false},{"id":12180,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"894","title":"feat: allow title to have only one character","author":"alesancor1","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/pull/894","summary":"Reduces project title min_length from 2 to 1 so single-char names (valid per name regex) don't fail title validation. Pending, 0 reviewers, CI green, but maintainer disputes the approach and prefers tightening name to min 2 chars instead.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"The 1-line change is trivial and CI is green, but the maintainer (lengau) explicitly pushed back on the approach, arguing the store rejects single-character names and that Rockcraft should instead require a name of at least 2 chars (rockcraft#943). The PR is labeled 'Needs information' with no resolution to that design disagreement, so it needs a maintainer decision on direction rather than a mechanical merge.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":25.5,"staleness":72,"complexity":15,"confidence":70},"age_days":372,"labels":["Status: Needs information"],"created_at":"2025-09-05T15:44:13+00:00","updated_at":"2025-09-18T02:32:24+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":72,"complexity":15,"support_request":null,"confidence":70,"impact":30,"quick_win":25.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":12694,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"379","title":"Use predefined exit codes","author":"mattculler","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/issues/379","summary":"Refactor request to replace hardcoded sysexits.h magic numbers with os.EX_* constants in application.py, errors.py, remotebuild.py, and to expose error exit codes for tests. PR #387 merged and fixed the simple cases; 128+SIGINT and a few magic numbers (77/75) remain.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"PR #387 (merged, commit e8651e46) resolved the main body of the issue — application.py, errors.py, and services/remotebuild.py now use os.EX_* constants — but the follow-up items from the comments remain unaddressed: application.py:440 and util/logging.py:65 still use bare 128 + signal.SIGINT, and commands/remote.py still hardcodes retcode=77 and return 75 with explanatory comments, exactly the anti-pattern the issue targets. The work is small and well-scoped, so it merits keeping open rather than closing as stale.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":12.75,"staleness":72,"complexity":15,"confidence":80,"support_request":0},"age_days":795,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-07-09T19:42:54+00:00","updated_at":"2025-05-23T17:26:50+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":72,"complexity":15,"support_request":0,"confidence":80,"impact":15,"quick_win":12.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":22656,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"428","title":"Add a diagram for parts.rst","author":"sed-i","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/pull/428","summary":"Adds a mermaid diagram to the parts documentation. Pending review since Apr 2023; author offered to close in Nov 2023, maintainer said to keep in watchlist pending doc refactoring. Target file has since moved to docs/common/craft-parts/explanation/parts.rst and no diagram was added.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"Author explicitly offered to close (Nov 2023) and maintainer deferred to a doc refactoring that has since been completed (#688, #680). The target file moved from docs/explanation/parts.rst to docs/common/craft-parts/explanation/parts.rst and the project uses static SVG/PNG images, not mermaid. A maintainer should confirm whether the diagram is still wanted and in what format before the author reworks the PR.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":72,"complexity":10,"confidence":78},"age_days":1234,"labels":[],"created_at":"2023-04-28T08:50:14+00:00","updated_at":"2025-03-11T14:28:31+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":72,"complexity":10,"support_request":null,"confidence":78,"impact":20,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":22647,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"437","title":"Add keyword to python plugin to have it automatically provided","author":"sed-i","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/437","summary":"Feature request to add a keyword to the python plugin (like npm_include_node) so python3-venv is auto-added to stage-packages, removing the need to list it manually. Unimplemented, unlabelled, no maintainer response beyond a bot ticket.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is unlabelled with no maintainer response (only a bot-created Jira ticket CRAFT-2961), showing no sign of triage. The feature is still unimplemented — python_plugin.py has no such keyword and the docs still show manual `stage-packages: - python3-venv` — so the request remains valid and needs a maintainer to assess.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":19.25,"staleness":72,"complexity":45,"confidence":75,"support_request":15},"age_days":1229,"labels":[],"created_at":"2023-05-03T08:14:05+00:00","updated_at":"2025-03-11T14:29:16+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":72,"complexity":45,"support_request":15,"confidence":75,"impact":35,"quick_win":19.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":1694,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2443","title":"Add `AGENTS.md` to templates","author":"sed-i","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/2443","summary":"Enhancement request to add AGENTS.md (agentic coding instructions) to charmcraft init templates. Labeled Needs information; maintainer asked the author for a concrete example in Jan 2026, no response for over 6 months; no template changes made.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue carries the 'Status: Needs information' label, and on 2026-01-16 dimaqq asked the author to supply a charm with a good AGENTS.md to copy and trim down; the author has not responded in over 6 months (last activity 227 days ago), and grep confirms no AGENTS.md was ever added to charmcraft/templates. A maintainer request for details unanswered beyond 6 months justifies closing, and the author can reopen or file a PR if still interested.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":16.25,"staleness":72,"complexity":35,"confidence":78,"support_request":5},"age_days":367,"labels":["Status: Needs information","Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2025-09-11T04:33:48+00:00","updated_at":"2026-01-16T06:49:06+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":72,"complexity":35,"support_request":5,"confidence":78,"impact":25,"quick_win":16.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":22414,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"670","title":"Format partition warnings and errors inside the error class","author":"mr-cal","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/670","summary":"Refactor task: partition warning/error classes should format indented messages internally instead of callers passing pre-indented strings. Unlabeled, no maintainer activity since 2024-05-17; code at HEAD still passes indented strings, so the work remains unaddressed.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no assignee, and no maintainer response — the only comment is the autogenerated Jira-sync bot message (2024-05-17). I verified at HEAD that parts.py still builds pre-indented strings (e.g. '    misused partition ...' at parts.py:1189) and PartitionUsageError/PartitionUsageWarning in errors.py just join them, so the described refactor is still applicable but has never been triaged or prioritized.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":9.0,"staleness":72,"complexity":40,"confidence":85,"support_request":0},"age_days":933,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-02-22T13:37:26+00:00","updated_at":"2025-03-11T14:29:03+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":72,"complexity":40,"support_request":0,"confidence":85,"impact":15,"quick_win":9.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":22308,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"777","title":"Reduce the scope of the public API","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/777","summary":"Maintainer-filed refactor to shrink craft-parts' public API by making module files private (underscore prefix) and exporting only relevant names via __all__. No comments or labels; __all__ exists in several packages but module files are still public, so work is incomplete.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no comments, and no maintainer response in 780 days, so it has never been triaged. It is not stale-closeable because the core work is still unaddressed: craft_parts/__init__.py still does `from .actions import ...` (public module), and no commit renamed module files to underscore-prefixed names. PR #142 (commit 7dbb5778, 'api: add missing typed marker and declare public api names') only partially overlaps by adding __all__ entries, so the issue remains valid but needs a maintainer decision on whether to pursue this breaking refactor.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":12.5,"staleness":72,"complexity":75,"confidence":70,"support_request":0},"age_days":792,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-07-12T16:48:13+00:00","updated_at":"2025-03-11T14:28:59+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":72,"complexity":75,"support_request":0,"confidence":70,"impact":50,"quick_win":12.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":12490,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"583","title":"Redesign project file resolver","author":"mr-cal","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/issues/583","summary":"Task to redesign project file resolver to search multiple locations and handle file-vs-directory edge cases. Still unimplemented in current code; no labels, no assignee, no maintainer engagement beyond auto Jira sync.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"Filed by a maintainer as a clear task with concrete requirements, but has no labels, no assignee, and no human maintainer response (only the Jira sync bot at 465 days). The current resolve_project_file_path() in project.py still only checks one location and raises ProjectDirectoryTypeError for files, confirming the issue remains open and relevant. Needs triage to be prioritized or explicitly deferred.","scores":{"impact":55,"quick_win":24.75,"staleness":72,"complexity":55,"confidence":78,"support_request":0},"age_days":646,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-12-05T20:06:24+00:00","updated_at":"2025-05-23T17:26:51+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":72,"complexity":55,"support_request":0,"confidence":78,"impact":55,"quick_win":24.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":2152,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"1977","title":"Alert about all charmlib updates available (not just ones matching the spec) on pack","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/1977","summary":"Feature request: charmcraft pack should warn about any available charmlib update, not just those matching the charm-libs spec; fetch-libs likewise. Open since 2023, no maintainer response beyond Jira sync; charmlibs commands are now deprecated.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"No labels, no assignee, and the only comment is the automated Jira sync (CRAFT-3622) from 2024-10-30 — no maintainer has assessed, prioritised, or responded. The request is a genuine feature/bug (pack should warn on any available update, not only spec-matching ones), so it is not a support question, but it has never been triaged. Note the charmlibs commands now emit deprecation warnings, which may affect relevance.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":19.25,"staleness":72,"complexity":45,"confidence":62,"support_request":10},"age_days":682,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-10-30T14:56:00+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:17:53+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":72,"complexity":45,"support_request":10,"confidence":62,"impact":35,"quick_win":19.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":1931,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2201","title":"Review and update minimum RAM requirements in docs","author":"medubelko","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/2201","summary":"Task to re-evaluate and update the 4GB minimum RAM requirement in release notes and 12-factor tutorials, after feedback that tutorials are slow even at 8GB due to Multipass. Unlabeled, no human activity for ~13 months, docs still state 4GB.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no assignee, and its only comment is the autogenerated Jira-sync bot (CRAFT-4303) — no human triage or acknowledgement. I verified the docs still state 'minimum of 4GB RAM' in 9 release-notes files and 6 tutorial files at HEAD, so the task is still valid and actionable, but it needs a maintainer to decide the realistic minimum and assign the doc updates.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":17.5,"staleness":72,"complexity":30,"confidence":80,"support_request":0},"age_days":557,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-03-04T17:29:03+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:17:56+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":72,"complexity":30,"support_request":0,"confidence":80,"impact":25,"quick_win":17.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":7220,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"4658","title":"File permissions leak through to built snap","author":"samuelallan72","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/4658","summary":"Host umask leaks into built snap file permissions, causing permission errors at runtime. Reported March 2024 with detailed repro; only a Jira-sync bot comment, no maintainer response or labels in ~1.5 years.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no assignee, and no maintainer response beyond the auto-generated Jira ticket (CRAFT-2614) created 2024-03-13. Last activity was 536 days ago. The bug is real and well-documented with a clear repro (umask 027 vs 002 producing different snap permissions), but it has never been triaged, acknowledged, or scoped by a maintainer. It needs a maintainer to assess whether permission normalization should be added to the parts copy/pack pipeline.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":22.5,"staleness":72,"complexity":55,"confidence":62,"support_request":5},"age_days":914,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-03-13T00:19:52+00:00","updated_at":"2025-03-13T18:36:51+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":72,"complexity":55,"support_request":5,"confidence":62,"impact":50,"quick_win":22.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":4847,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"828","title":"docs: clarify documentation","author":"alesancor1","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/pull/828","summary":"Docs PR unifying mkdir steps, adding directory structure displays, and simplifying code blocks across 11 tutorial files. Author requested review in March 2025; no maintainer response since. Changes still applicable to current tutorials.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"Author pinged @canonical/starcraft-reviewers on 2025-03-17 with 'ready for review' but received no response in 381 days. Current tutorial files (express.rst line 49, flask.rst line 24, django.rst line 24, etc.) still contain the old separate mkdir patterns and lack directory structure displays, confirming the changes remain applicable and not superseded.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":21.25,"staleness":72,"complexity":15,"confidence":78},"age_days":557,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-03-04T16:58:52+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:12:52+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":72,"complexity":15,"support_request":null,"confidence":78,"impact":25,"quick_win":21.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":21795,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1290","title":"Unnecessary priming of dependency when priming a part","author":"upils","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/1290","summary":"Priming a part also primes its dependencies unnecessarily; proposed fix to dependency_prerequisite_step. Triaged as bug, but maintainer questioned whether behavior is intentional and requested a use case; reporter never responded. Code has evolved with overlay support but core behavior unchanged.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer @lengau asked on 2025-09-11 for a use case justifying why dependency priming should be skipped, and the reporter never responded. Over 10 months have passed with no further activity. The behavior may be intentional (dependency output needed downstream), and without the requested justification the issue cannot be validated as a bug.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":16.5,"staleness":72,"complexity":45,"confidence":78,"support_request":10},"age_days":366,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Bug"],"created_at":"2025-09-11T15:22:58+00:00","updated_at":"2025-09-12T07:36:13+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":72,"complexity":45,"support_request":10,"confidence":78,"impact":30,"quick_win":16.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":22166,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"919","title":"Opt out of adding git as a build-package","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/919","summary":"Feature request to allow opting out of git as a build-package when craft.git binary is present. Depends on #900 (closed without implementation), but related PR #925 already merged craft.git preference. No maintainer activity in ~18 months, unlabelled.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is unlabelled with no maintainer response beyond the Jira sync bot, and its explicit dependency (#900) was closed without implementation. However, PR #925 (\"feat: use craft.git for git where possible\") was merged and implemented the core craft.git preference that #900 sought, while the actual opt-out mechanism in _get_build_packages/get_packages_for_source_type remains unimplemented. A maintainer needs to assess whether #925 effectively unblocks this work and decide on an opt-out approach.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":22.0,"staleness":72,"complexity":45,"confidence":72,"support_request":10},"age_days":649,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-12-02T16:59:59+00:00","updated_at":"2025-03-11T14:28:46+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":72,"complexity":45,"support_request":10,"confidence":72,"impact":40,"quick_win":22.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":2206,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"1923","title":"`spread.yaml` templates: consider LXD VMs over or in addition to multipass","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/1923","summary":"Feature request to consider using LXD VMs in charmcraft's spread.yaml templates (test-machine/test-kubernetes) instead of or in addition to multipass. No maintainer response or labels; last activity 381 days ago.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue was filed by a maintainer (lengau) as a feature consideration with no labels, no comments, and no assignee. The .extension.j2 templates already contain lxd-vm allocate/discard functions (added in PR #2401), but the spread.yaml.j2 templates still only use the 'craft' backend, so the feature is partially scaffolded but not wired up. No maintainer has triaged or responded since filing.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":72,"complexity":55,"confidence":65,"support_request":10},"age_days":717,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-09-25T13:19:41+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:17:46+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":72,"complexity":55,"support_request":10,"confidence":65,"impact":40,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":12966,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"105","title":"Custom compatibility tags in the provider service","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/issues/105","summary":"Feature request to add a per-app compatibility tag addendum to AppMetadata so downstream apps like charmcraft need not override ProviderService.get_base. Unlabelled, no maintainer activity since 2024-03; feature still unimplemented in current code.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no assignee, and its only comment is the autogenerated Jira-sync bot message (2024-03-12), so it has never been categorised or prioritised despite being filed by a maintainer. The request remains valid — ProviderService.compatibility_tag is still hardcoded to '.1' (provider.py:97-99) and AppMetadata has no such field — but it needs a maintainer to decide scope and priority.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":22.75,"staleness":72,"complexity":35,"confidence":80,"support_request":10},"age_days":1060,"labels":[],"created_at":"2023-10-18T19:23:31+00:00","updated_at":"2025-05-23T17:27:07+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":72,"complexity":35,"support_request":10,"confidence":80,"impact":35,"quick_win":22.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":12287,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"787","title":"Validate spread expressions before packing in `*craft test`","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/issues/787","summary":"Enhancement to validate spread test expressions before the packing step in craft test, so users get fast feedback on invalid expressions instead of waiting for a full pack cycle. Filed by a maintainer 444 days ago with no comments or further triage.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue carries only the initial Type: Enhancement label with zero comments, no assignee, and no maintainer acknowledgement in 444 days. The surrounding testing service code is still actively developed (PRs #1167, #1168), so the enhancement remains relevant, but a maintainer needs to decide whether to prioritise or defer it.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":13.75,"staleness":72,"complexity":45,"confidence":78,"support_request":5},"age_days":456,"labels":["Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2025-06-13T14:04:21+00:00","updated_at":"2025-06-13T14:05:50+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":72,"complexity":45,"support_request":5,"confidence":78,"impact":25,"quick_win":13.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":2198,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"1931","title":"Successfully pack charm with incorrect charm.py file permission","author":"yhaliaw","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/1931","summary":"charmcraft pack succeeds even when src/charm.py lacks the execute bit, producing a charm that fails at deploy with 'Permission denied'. Requested a warning/error or auto-fix at pack time. No maintainer activity; an entrypoint linter now exists but only runs via charmcraft analyze, not pack.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"No labels, no comments, no assignee, and last activity 381 days ago, so it has never been triaged. The problem is still real: charm_builder.py never chmods the entrypoint, and the Entrypoint linter (linters.py:542, 'The entrypoint file is not executable') only runs through charmcraft analyze, not as part of pack, so the requested pack-time warning/error is unimplemented. Not close_stale because the behavior is still reproducible and relevant.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":29.25,"staleness":72,"complexity":35,"confidence":62,"support_request":10},"age_days":711,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-10-02T04:29:57+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:18:08+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":72,"complexity":35,"support_request":10,"confidence":62,"impact":45,"quick_win":29.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":13662,"project_name":"craft-cli","source":"github","external_id":"78","title":"ArgumentParsingError for command not found should hint at the command that raised it","author":"sergiusens","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-cli/issues/78","summary":"Feature request to add the offending command name as an attribute on ArgumentParsingError raised for unknown commands, enabling programmatic error handling. Still unimplemented in current code.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"Filed by maintainer sergiusens ~4 years ago with zero comments, no labels, and no assignee. The ArgumentParsingError class in craft_cli/errors.py still has no command attribute, and dispatcher.py line 564 still raises it with only a help-text string, so the feature remains unimplemented. No evidence of any related PR or issue addressing it.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":21.25,"staleness":72,"complexity":15,"confidence":85,"support_request":10},"age_days":1604,"labels":[],"created_at":"2022-04-23T01:19:15+00:00","updated_at":"2025-03-10T18:59:13+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":72,"complexity":15,"support_request":10,"confidence":85,"impact":25,"quick_win":21.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":16328,"project_name":"starflow","source":"github","external_id":"54","title":"Golang osv scanner is outdated","author":"cmatsuoka","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/starflow/issues/54","summary":"Golang OSV scanner snap is outdated and cannot handle go.mod toolchain entries. Upstream snap fix exists in edge channel but workflow still installs stable. Unlabelled, no assignee, inactive 410 days.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"Filed by maintainer cmatsuoka but has no labels, no assignee, and no committed action plan. Comments from @lengau and @upils confirm the upstream snap is fixed and available in the edge channel, and @lengau suggested using edge, but no maintainer has followed through. The workflow at .github/workflows/scan-golang.yaml still runs 'sudo snap install osv-scanner' without a channel, so the problem persists.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":35.2,"staleness":72,"complexity":12,"confidence":78,"support_request":5},"age_days":491,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-05-09T12:53:35+00:00","updated_at":"2025-07-17T14:51:16+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":72,"complexity":12,"support_request":5,"confidence":78,"impact":40,"quick_win":35.2,"has_related_links":true},{"id":15908,"project_name":"starbase","source":"github","external_id":"337","title":"Versioning method is deprecated","author":"bepri","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/starbase/issues/337","summary":"Deprecated setuptools-scm 'post-release' version scheme in use, needs migration. Unlabelled, no human maintainer response (only bot Jira-sync comments); scheme still present in codebase.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"No labels, no assignee, and the only comments are two autogenerated Jira-sync bot messages (CRAFT-4051/4052) — no human maintainer has acknowledged, categorised, or prioritised it. The deprecated 'post-release' scheme is still present in the codebase (1 hit), so it remains a valid technical-debt item that needs triage rather than closure.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":21.0,"staleness":72,"complexity":40,"confidence":62,"support_request":5},"age_days":592,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-01-28T17:58:50+00:00","updated_at":"2025-04-29T16:53:36+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":72,"complexity":40,"support_request":5,"confidence":62,"impact":35,"quick_win":21.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":39822,"project_name":"craft-providers","source":"github","external_id":"445","title":"`developer-id` of the `snap-revision` is not asserted","author":"mr-cal","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-providers/issues/445","summary":"Valid bug: craft-providers fails to assert developer-id when it differs from publisher-id, causing snap injection to fail for snaps like rockcraft revision 1194. Issue is 1032 days old with no maintainer comments.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"This is a valid bug with clear reproduction steps and a concrete fix outlined in the issue body. The code in snap_installer.py still only asserts publisher-id (line 283-286), not developer-id, confirming the bug persists. Related PR #948 claims to fix this but remains open. Despite being 1032 days old, the issue remains relevant as the underlying code hasn't changed to address it.","scores":{"impact":70,"quick_win":42.0,"staleness":70,"complexity":40,"confidence":60,"support_request":10},"age_days":1040,"labels":["Type: Bug"],"created_at":"2023-11-08T08:07:59+00:00","updated_at":"2026-04-22T02:47:59+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":70,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":60,"impact":70,"quick_win":42.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":5332,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"343","title":"apt package is not installed in the image.","author":"Abuelodelanada","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/343","summary":"stage-packages (ca-certificates) missing from final rock image because the part's stage: filter restricts output to only bin/alertmanager and bin/amtool. Maintainer identified root cause; reporter acknowledged. No fix or label applied.","suggested_action":"close_not_a_bug","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer sergiusens identified the root cause on 2023-08-14: the part's `stage: [bin/alertmanager, bin/amtool]` filter restricts staged files to only those two paths, so stage-packages files are excluded by design in craft-parts. The reporter acknowledged the explanation on 2024-02-16. The behavior is working as intended; the fix is a configuration change (use a separate nil-plugin part for stage-packages or remove the restrictive stage filter). No code change in rockcraft is required.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":18.75,"staleness":70,"complexity":25,"confidence":72,"support_request":55},"age_days":1128,"labels":[],"created_at":"2023-08-11T19:27:02+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:12:45+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":70,"complexity":25,"support_request":55,"confidence":72,"impact":25,"quick_win":18.75,"has_related_links":false},{"id":2146,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"1983","title":"`--bases-index` ignored on charmcraft 3","author":"carlcsaposs-canonical","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/1983","summary":"charmcraft 3 pack ignores --bases-index, building all bases instead of the requested one. Reported on 3.2.1; no maintainer response, only a Jira sync bot comment. Option still exists in code but appears unused in the pack run path.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"No maintainer has acknowledged, labelled, or responded to this bug; the only comment is an autogenerated Jira sync (CRAFT-3670). The reporter provides a clear reproduction and logs, and the code still defines --bases-index in PackCommand._fill_parser, but I found no evidence it is consumed in the pack run path, so it needs triage to confirm the bug and decide whether to fix or document the deprecation in favor of --platform.","scores":{"impact":55,"quick_win":33.0,"staleness":70,"complexity":40,"confidence":70,"support_request":5},"age_days":673,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-11-08T11:55:53+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:18:06+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":70,"complexity":40,"support_request":5,"confidence":70,"impact":55,"quick_win":33.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":4777,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"898","title":"Hello world tutorial doesn't work when using 24.04 base","author":"seb128","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/898","summary":"Hello World tutorial fails with bare base + ubuntu@24.04 build-base: 'hello' binary not found at runtime (usrmerge/loader issue). Tutorial has since been updated to use ubuntu@26.04 base, so the specific repro no longer matches current docs. No maintainer response; 0 comments.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The tutorial (docs/tutorial/code/hello-world/rockcraft.yaml) was updated in commit bdf0258d to use 'base: ubuntu@26.04' instead of the bare base + 24.04 build-base combination reported here, so the specific documentation repro is no longer applicable. The issue has 0 comments and no maintainer engagement over 445 days. If the underlying bare-base usrmerge bug persists, it warrants a separate bug report rather than keeping this docs issue open.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":70,"complexity":40,"confidence":65,"support_request":10},"age_days":457,"labels":["Type: Documentation"],"created_at":"2025-06-12T18:55:00+00:00","updated_at":"2025-12-11T14:41:25+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":70,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":65,"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":21927,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1158","title":"\"unknown argument ignored: lazytime\" in overlay operations","author":"tigarmo","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/1158","summary":"fuse-overlayfs on jammy/noble prints 'unknown argument ignored: lazytime' during every overlay operation, polluting build output. Triaged by a maintainer with an internal ticket, but no code fix yet; warning still present in current code.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is triaged (label 'Status: Triaged', filed by maintainer tigarmo with internal ticket CRAFT-4633) and I confirmed the warning is still emitted: mount_overlayfs in craft_parts/utils/os_utils.py still calls fuse-overlayfs via subprocess.check_call with no stderr filtering, and no commit addresses it. It is inactive (~14 months, only a bot comment) but not obsolete, so it should remain open; the fix (filtering the specific stderr line) is small but needs care not to mask real errors.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":17.5,"staleness":70,"complexity":30,"confidence":80,"support_request":0},"age_days":436,"labels":["Status: Triaged"],"created_at":"2025-07-03T12:34:36+00:00","updated_at":"2025-07-03T12:34:55+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":70,"complexity":30,"support_request":0,"confidence":80,"impact":25,"quick_win":17.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":5492,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"182","title":"Provide more meaningful output when rockcraft.yaml is invalid","author":"arturo-seijas","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/182","summary":"Rockcraft pack on an invalid rockcraft.yaml prints a raw pyyaml ScannerError traceback instead of a friendly message with the offending line. The underlying craft-application library now wraps YAML errors in a YamlError with problem text and mark details, so the original complaint is likely already addressed.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is old (last activity 1301 days ago, no labels, only a clarifying exchange between reporter and maintainer) but the fix appears to have landed in the shared craft-application dependency: commit df906c31 'fix(yaml): wrap error message for YAML errors (#427)' introduced YamlError.from_yaml_error, and safe_yaml_load in craft_application/util/yaml.py now raises YamlError with the problem text and full mark (line/column) instead of leaking a raw ScannerError. Rockcraft's ProjectService inherits this path, so the behavior is likely fixed, but no maintainer has confirmed or closed the issue, so it should be verified against a current rockcraft release before closing.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":30.0,"staleness":70,"complexity":25,"confidence":75,"support_request":10},"age_days":1314,"labels":[],"created_at":"2023-02-06T16:39:08+00:00","updated_at":"2023-02-07T16:07:33+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":70,"complexity":25,"support_request":10,"confidence":75,"impact":40,"quick_win":30.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":4811,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"864","title":"docs: add tabs for docker and podman","author":"alesancor1","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/pull/864","summary":"Docs PR adding Podman as a tabbed alternative to Docker in the hello-world tutorial. 500 days old, 0 comments, pending review, 4 failing CI checks (snap-tests, slow tests, lint/files, validate-schema).","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"The PR is a documentation-only change adding Podman tabs, but it is 500 days old with zero maintainer interaction and 4 failing CI checks (snap-tests, slow tests jammy 3.10, lint/files, validate-schema). The repo has since restructured its docs (sphinx-tabs extension is now commented out in conf.py while RST still uses .. tabs::), so the diff likely needs rebasing before it can be evaluated. A maintainer should review whether the Podman alternative is still wanted and reconcile the tabs mechanism.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":21.0,"staleness":70,"complexity":30,"confidence":55},"age_days":512,"labels":["Type: Documentation"],"created_at":"2025-04-18T20:37:01+00:00","updated_at":"2025-12-11T14:26:13+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":70,"complexity":30,"support_request":null,"confidence":55,"impact":30,"quick_win":21.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":22334,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"751","title":"Silent failure on certain store issues","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/751","summary":"craft-parts silently returns None instead of raising an error when store queries fail with 500-series HTTP errors during build-snaps resolution. Triaged as a bug. The retry loop in get_store_snap_info still swallows errors after retries are exhausted.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is triaged (Status: Triaged, Type: Bug) and the bug is confirmed still present in current code: get_store_snap_info() in craft_parts/packages/snaps.py retries 5 times on HTTPError but returns None after exhaustion instead of raising, so builds continue and fail later with a confusing 'go not found' error. Inactivity alone (~16 months) is not grounds to close since the problem is unfixed and reproducible; the fix is modest but needs care around the retry rationale (armv7 test infra timeouts) and the in_store property which catches SnapUnavailable.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"staleness":70,"complexity":40,"confidence":82,"support_request":5},"age_days":827,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Bug"],"created_at":"2024-06-07T13:56:12+00:00","updated_at":"2025-04-21T12:20:49+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":70,"complexity":40,"support_request":5,"confidence":82,"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":2968,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"1159","title":"Build python packages with multiple threads","author":"dstathis","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/1159","summary":"Feature request to build Python packages from source with parallel threads (e.g. MAKEFLAGS/-j) in charmcraft. Maintainer acknowledged in 2023 and flagged design questions around mixed build systems; no label, no further activity for over a year.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer lengau explicitly triaged and endorsed the request ('This definitely makes sense, especially in coordination with #1140') and raised a real design question about mixed build systems, so it has maintainer buy-in despite 381 days of inactivity. The feature is still unimplemented (no MAKEFLAGS handling in charmcraft code) and the need persists since the python plugin still runs pip with --no-binary=:all: in strict mode; a partial workaround exists via the part's build-environment key, which lowers but does not eliminate the value of a dedicated option.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":15.75,"staleness":70,"complexity":55,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":1157,"labels":[],"created_at":"2023-07-13T21:53:02+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:18:23+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":70,"complexity":55,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":35,"quick_win":15.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":5979,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"5931","title":"docs: golang plugin doc missing information on cross-compiling","author":"sed-i","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/5931","summary":"Go plugin docs omit cross-compilation; reporter shows cross-compile fails because the plugin sets GOBIN (go install error), and clearing GOBIN triggers a missing install-dir error. Untriaged, no labels or maintainer response in ~255 days.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no comments, and no maintainer response in ~255 days, so it has not been triaged. The underlying problem still exists — craft-parts' go_plugin.py unconditionally sets GOBIN and runs `go install ./...`, which fails on cross-compiles — so it remains relevant rather than stale. The old snapcraft go-plugin cross-compile PRs (#1338, #1343) targeted the pre-craft-parts plugin and do not resolve this.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":22.75,"staleness":70,"complexity":35,"confidence":70,"support_request":45},"age_days":268,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-12-19T04:01:14+00:00","updated_at":"2025-12-19T04:01:14+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":70,"complexity":35,"support_request":45,"confidence":70,"impact":35,"quick_win":22.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":2123,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2006","title":"Noisy output in newest charmcraft","author":"dimaqq","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/2006","summary":"Charmcraft 3.2.2 build logs a pip cache permission warning ('/root/.cache/pip not owned or writable') during dependency install; reporter notes it appears under --verbose and hints at a real cache/permission issue. No maintainer response; last activity 381 days ago.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"No maintainer has acknowledged, labelled, or responded to this issue (only the reporter's own follow-up comment), so it remains untriaged. The underlying concern is plausible: the codebase has since added explicit handling to ensure /root/.cache exists (commits 9cc16dc5 'fix(provider): ensure /root/.cache exists (#2134)' and ca66a94c '#2140'), suggesting the cache-permission problem was real and addressed in later versions, but no commit or PR explicitly references this issue, so a human should confirm whether the fix resolves it before closing.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":70,"complexity":40,"confidence":55,"support_request":10},"age_days":655,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-11-27T06:49:08+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:18:04+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":70,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":55,"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":2051,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2078","title":"`charmcraft clean` does not clean all platforms for charm","author":"carlcsaposs-canonical","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/2078","summary":"charmcraft clean only removes LXC containers for platforms currently listed in charmcraft.yaml, leaving stale containers for removed platforms. Reported with repro steps; linked to issue #1338 in Jan 2025, no further activity.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has a clear reproduction and was acknowledged by a maintainer (sed-i) linking related issue #1338, but no labels, assignee, or resolution have been applied. The clean_instances behavior in craft-application's provider service still cleans per-platform instances, so the bug likely persists. Needs triage to determine if this is intended behavior or a bug to fix.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":21.0,"staleness":70,"complexity":40,"confidence":75,"support_request":0},"age_days":606,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-01-14T14:33:19+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:18:00+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":70,"complexity":40,"support_request":0,"confidence":75,"impact":35,"quick_win":21.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":39803,"project_name":"craft-providers","source":"github","external_id":"754","title":"Run Multipass tests on Linux CI","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-providers/issues/754","summary":"Enhancement to run Multipass integration tests on Linux CI runners now that nested virtualization is supported. Related WIP PR #932 exists but is inactive.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no maintainer comments or assignee despite being 458 days old. A related WIP PR #932 exists but is inactive with failing CI checks and zero review comments. A maintainer should assess whether to continue the PR, close it, or address the request differently.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"staleness":70,"complexity":40,"confidence":75,"support_request":10},"age_days":466,"labels":["Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2025-06-04T01:08:52+00:00","updated_at":"2026-04-22T02:48:34+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":70,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":75,"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":2043,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2086","title":"Docs: Maintenance tasks that improve consistency","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/2086","summary":"Docs cleanup task to remove 'How to' from how-to guide titles for consistency. No comments or labels; last activity 381 days ago. Several how-to pages already use bare infinitive titles (e.g. 'Manage charms', 'Add an icon to Charmhub'), but the style guide still mandates the 'How to' pattern, so the task is partially done and unresolved.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is a maintainer-authored docs task with no labels or comments, but the work is clearly not finished: the doc-style-guide.md still prescribes the 'How to [action] [object]' title pattern, and grep shows many how-to pages retain 'How to' in descriptions/titles. It is a small, well-scoped consistency task that remains valid, so it should stay open rather than be closed as stale.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":17.0,"staleness":70,"complexity":15,"confidence":70,"support_request":0},"age_days":603,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-01-17T16:16:39+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:17:46+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":70,"complexity":15,"support_request":0,"confidence":70,"impact":20,"quick_win":17.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":39791,"project_name":"craft-providers","source":"github","external_id":"568","title":"Images contain out-of-date packages","author":"mr-cal","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-providers/issues/568","summary":"Enhancement to update packages in base images. The dist-upgrade at image setup time suggested by sergiusens has been implemented in craft-providers.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The enhancement has been implemented: craft_providers/bases/ubuntu.py now runs 'apt-get -y dist-upgrade' at image setup time (commit 38e304f, PR #814). The issue is no longer relevant as the requested feature is in place.","scores":{"impact":60,"quick_win":48.0,"staleness":70,"complexity":20,"confidence":85,"support_request":0},"age_days":856,"labels":["Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2024-05-09T13:39:53+00:00","updated_at":"2026-04-22T02:48:46+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":70,"complexity":20,"support_request":0,"confidence":85,"impact":60,"quick_win":48.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":12818,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"255","title":"Properly represent multi-line yaml strings","author":"cmatsuoka","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/issues/255","summary":"Multi-line YAML strings (description, scriptlets) not using the block-style representer when marshaled. Maintainer confirmed dump_yaml already handles it correctly; the _repr_str representer is present and wired into dump_yaml in current code.","suggested_action":"close_not_a_bug","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer lengau demonstrated with a reproducer that util.dump_yaml already produces correct block-style output (|- and |) for multi-line strings, and the current code confirms _repr_str is defined and registered via yaml.add_representer in dump_yaml. The behavior is working as intended, so this is resolved rather than an open bug.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":34.0,"staleness":70,"complexity":15,"confidence":75,"support_request":10},"age_days":926,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-02-29T19:14:54+00:00","updated_at":"2025-05-23T17:27:01+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":70,"complexity":15,"support_request":10,"confidence":75,"impact":40,"quick_win":34.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":39786,"project_name":"craft-providers","source":"github","external_id":"450","title":"Timer thread logging is overly verbose","author":"mr-cal","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-providers/issues/450","summary":"Enhancement to reduce timer thread logging verbosity and change update interval from 5s to 30s. Open 1031 days with minimal maintainer interaction.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Valid enhancement from maintainer @mr-cal requesting reduced timer thread logging verbosity and less frequent timer updates (30s instead of 5s). The issue is clearly scoped with specific code references (launcher.py InstanceTimer class, lxc.py line 1094) and has maintainer buy-in, though it's been open for over 2 years with limited activity.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":30.0,"staleness":70,"complexity":25,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":1039,"labels":["Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2023-11-08T11:39:30+00:00","updated_at":"2026-04-22T02:50:06+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":70,"complexity":25,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":40,"quick_win":30.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":2318,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"1811","title":"Document using Charmcraft under WSL","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/1811","summary":"Documentation task to write a guide for running Charmcraft on Windows under WSL (systemd, snapd, snapcraft). No labels or comments; still relevant since Charmcraft 4.0 dropped native Windows support and recommends WSL, but no WSL docs exist yet.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no comments, and no assignee, showing no sign of categorisation or prioritisation despite being filed by a maintainer. It remains relevant because the 4.0 release notes (commit b04fae05) direct Windows users to WSL after 'feat!: drop Windows support (#2307)', yet a repo-wide search confirms no WSL how-to exists in docs/howto. It should be labelled and scheduled rather than closed, since the gap is real and the docs are actively maintained.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":29.75,"staleness":70,"complexity":15,"confidence":78,"support_request":0},"age_days":759,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-08-14T15:34:19+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:17:54+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":70,"complexity":15,"support_request":0,"confidence":78,"impact":35,"quick_win":29.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":5192,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"483","title":"Summarise what has/has not been completed when failing or entering a `--debug` session","author":"ca-scribner","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/483","summary":"Feature request to print a summary of completed/incomplete build steps when a rockcraft pack fails or when entering a --debug session, to help users understand where they are in the build process. No maintainer response; only an automated Jira sync bot comment. No evidence of implementation in the codebase.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no assignee, and the only comment is an automated Jira sync bot message from 2024-02-13. No maintainer has acknowledged, triaged, or responded to the feature request. The last activity was 381 days ago, but the feature (summarizing build step progress on failure or in debug sessions) has not been implemented in the codebase based on the available evidence. This is a legitimate feature request that needs maintainer assessment.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":70,"complexity":55,"confidence":65,"support_request":10},"age_days":942,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-02-13T21:18:05+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:12:49+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":70,"complexity":55,"support_request":10,"confidence":65,"impact":40,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":21840,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1245","title":"meson plugin: Support `disable-parallel` parameter","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/1245","summary":"Request to add the disable-parallel part property to the meson plugin, mirroring the autotools implementation. Labeled 'Needs information' and waiting on a real-world use case; no activity for ~12 months and the feature is still unimplemented.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The maintainer (issue author) triaged it with 'Status: Needs information' and explicitly scoped it as 'extremely low priority until someone shows us a real-world use case', so it is intentionally held open rather than abandoned. The feature is confirmed still unimplemented in meson_plugin.py (ninja runs with no -j control), so it is not outdated; closing as stale would be premature since the request remains applicable.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":12.75,"staleness":70,"complexity":15,"confidence":82,"support_request":0},"age_days":375,"labels":["Type: Enhancement","Status: Needs information"],"created_at":"2025-09-02T15:26:26+00:00","updated_at":"2025-09-02T15:26:26+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":70,"complexity":15,"support_request":0,"confidence":82,"impact":15,"quick_win":12.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":21833,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1252","title":"uv plugin: Support `disable-parallel` parameter","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/1252","summary":"uv plugin lacks disable-parallel part property support. Low-priority enhancement, labeled Needs information, blocked on the python plugin design decision (#1247) and a real-world use case. No activity for ~12 months.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is triaged (Type: Enhancement, Status: Needs information) and acknowledged by maintainer lengau, who explicitly deferred it pending the python plugin design in #1247, which is still open. It is part of an open series of sibling disable-parallel issues (#1232-#1247) and the uv plugin still lacks the property (only autotools implements it), so it remains applicable rather than obsolete despite ~12 months of inactivity.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":10.5,"staleness":70,"complexity":30,"confidence":80,"support_request":5},"age_days":375,"labels":["Type: Enhancement","Status: Needs information"],"created_at":"2025-09-02T15:27:40+00:00","updated_at":"2025-09-02T15:34:27+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":70,"complexity":30,"support_request":5,"confidence":80,"impact":15,"quick_win":10.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":5254,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"421","title":"Show link to full execution logs when `rockcraft pack --debug` enters debug session","author":"ca-scribner","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/421","summary":"Feature request: when `rockcraft pack --debug` drops the user into a debug shell after a build failure, also print the full execution log path so the user knows what failed. Maintainer acknowledged the report and explained the outer/inner instance log-copy behavior; no fix has landed.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels or assignee and the only maintainer interaction is tigarmo's Nov 2023 explanation of the two-instance log architecture, with no acknowledgement that the request itself is valid or planned. The 1.15 release notes mention printing the error before opening the debug shell, which partially addresses the UX gap, but there is no evidence the full-log link is now shown, so the issue remains untriaged and possibly partially addressed.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":19.5,"staleness":70,"complexity":35,"confidence":60,"support_request":10},"age_days":1019,"labels":[],"created_at":"2023-11-28T14:18:15+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:12:53+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":70,"complexity":35,"support_request":10,"confidence":60,"impact":30,"quick_win":19.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":21829,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1256","title":"Run CI on Focal","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/1256","summary":"CI task to add a self-hosted Focal runner for slow tests. Focal is still supported and referenced in qa.yaml as the lowest Python platform, but the requested runner has not been added. Triaged with a Jira ticket, inactive for ~12 months.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is triaged (label 'Status: Triaged', internal ticket CRAFT-4737 created) and still applicable: qa.yaml still tests focal via lowest-python-platform with a comment that an EOL base must be covered, yet the requested self-hosted-linux-amd64-focal-large runner is absent from all workflows. Inactivity for ~12 months is notable, but the underlying gap (no reproducible focal coverage for slow tests) persists, so it should stay open.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":28.0,"staleness":70,"complexity":30,"confidence":80,"support_request":5},"age_days":374,"labels":["Status: Triaged"],"created_at":"2025-09-03T21:24:53+00:00","updated_at":"2025-09-03T21:26:14+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":70,"complexity":30,"support_request":5,"confidence":80,"impact":40,"quick_win":28.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":21826,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1259","title":"Refactor repository method dispatching","author":"cmatsuoka","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/1259","summary":"Refactor _RepositoryProxy in craft_parts/packages to use top-level methods instead of a proxy class for deferred repository detection. Triaged enhancement, no PR created, proxy code still present in codebase.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is triaged (Status: Triaged, Type: Enhancement labels) and the _RepositoryProxy class still exists in craft_parts/packages/__init__.py, so the refactor remains applicable. Multiple call sites (executor.py, part_handler.py, lifecycle_manager.py, overlay_manager.py) would need updating, including special handling for _defer_evaluation in overlays, making it a moderate-scope internal cleanup with no user-facing impact.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":7.5,"staleness":70,"complexity":50,"confidence":80,"support_request":5},"age_days":372,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2025-09-05T13:16:10+00:00","updated_at":"2025-09-12T07:33:32+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":70,"complexity":50,"support_request":5,"confidence":80,"impact":15,"quick_win":7.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":15937,"project_name":"starbase","source":"github","external_id":"308","title":"Auto-format documentation source?","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/starbase/issues/308","summary":"Discussion on whether to auto-format documentation source (docstrings and RST), proposing docstrfmt. A maintainer noted it needs rigorous testing against Starter Pack conventions. Unlabelled, undecided, inactive ~16 months.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer medubelko substantively engaged on 2025-01-06, stating the choice 'would need fairly rigorous testing against our Starter Pack conventions' and flagging RST/MD readability bugbears, so the issue was assessed rather than left untriaged. However, no formatter has been adopted or decided upon, and the docs/ tree still exists, so it is not demonstrably obsolete despite ~16 months of inactivity. Confidence is moderate because repo tooling failed (no pinned SHA), preventing verification that no formatter was later added.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":13.75,"staleness":70,"complexity":45,"confidence":60,"support_request":10},"age_days":631,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-12-20T19:42:26+00:00","updated_at":"2025-04-29T16:53:15+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":70,"complexity":45,"support_request":10,"confidence":60,"impact":25,"quick_win":13.75,"has_related_links":false},{"id":11851,"project_name":"debcraft","source":"github","external_id":"148","title":"[Feature] Add support for triggers","author":"hector-cao","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/debcraft/issues/148","summary":"Feature request to let debcraft install user-provided Debian triggers files into package control metadata. Depends on #145 (maintainer scripts). No maintainer response, unlabelled, inactive 126 days.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is a well-scoped feature request from an external contributor with no labels, no maintainer response, and no assignee after 126 days. It explicitly depends on #145 (maintainer scripts), which is itself open and unlabelled, so the feature is blocked on that prerequisite. The generic install_package_control helper already supports arbitrary control file names (tests exercise name=\"triggers\"), so implementation is likely a small dedicated helper, but no maintainer has triaged or prioritized it.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"staleness":70,"complexity":40,"confidence":75,"support_request":5},"age_days":138,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-04-27T14:36:26+00:00","updated_at":"2026-04-27T14:36:26+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":70,"complexity":40,"support_request":5,"confidence":75,"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":2278,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"1851","title":"How-to doc for charmcraft test","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/1851","summary":"Request to write a how-to guide for the charmcraft test command, which is currently undocumented. No maintainer response or labels; only an auto-generated Jira sync comment. The command still exists in the codebase (spread tests, release notes), so the gap persists.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The charmcraft test command is still present in the codebase (spread tests in tests/spread/ubuntu-24.04/test-cmd, release notes referencing ref_commands_test), and no how-to guide for it exists in docs/howto, so the documentation gap is still valid. The issue was filed by a maintainer (lengau) and synced to an internal Jira ticket (CRAFT-3957), indicating it is tracked and intended to be addressed, so it should remain open despite inactivity.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":24.5,"staleness":70,"complexity":30,"confidence":75,"support_request":0},"age_days":747,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-08-26T21:50:19+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:18:00+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":70,"complexity":30,"support_request":0,"confidence":75,"impact":35,"quick_win":24.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":46470,"project_name":"fetch-service","source":"github","external_id":"473","title":"Inspector for DEP-11 metadata files","author":"cmatsuoka","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/fetch-service/issues/473","summary":"Feature request to add a DEP-11 metadata inspector to fetch-service. Triaged but no work started in 333 days. No DEP-11 or appstream references exist in the codebase.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is labeled 'Status: Triaged' and represents a legitimate feature gap (DEP-11 files downloaded by apt aren't recognized). No evidence suggests DEP-11 support is no longer relevant or has been implemented elsewhere. However, the 333-day inactivity and lack of prioritization signals this is a low-priority enhancement waiting for someone to pick it up.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":20.0,"staleness":70,"complexity":50,"confidence":60,"support_request":10},"age_days":337,"labels":["Status: Triaged"],"created_at":"2025-10-10T15:01:32+00:00","updated_at":"2025-10-10T15:02:06+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":70,"complexity":50,"support_request":10,"confidence":60,"impact":40,"quick_win":20.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":41188,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"1133","title":"test(spread): make LXD refresh in prepare more reliable","author":"lengau","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/pull/1133","summary":"Retry only the known LXD auto-refresh transient error in spread prepare to avoid hard failures. Has 1 unresolved review comment, 49 days of inactivity, and failing CI checks.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"PR has 1 unresolved review comment and addresses a real problem (LXD refresh race in spread tests). However, it's been inactive for 49 days and there's a related issue #1170 proposing a different approach (24-hour hold) to the same problem. A maintainer should follow up on the unresolved comment and decide whether to pursue this retry approach or #1170's wait-out approach.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":37.5,"staleness":70,"complexity":25,"confidence":65},"age_days":59,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-07-15T17:25:24+00:00","updated_at":"2026-07-17T23:15:29+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":70,"complexity":25,"support_request":null,"confidence":65,"impact":50,"quick_win":37.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":40588,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1632","title":"fix: wait when retrying snap store; fail install loudly","author":"james-garner-canonical","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/pull/1632","summary":"Fixes snap store query failures by adding retry delays and removing the store-query gate on snap install to fail loudly instead of silently skipping","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The PR addresses a real CI failure issue with a reasonable fix (adding sleep between retries and removing the store-query gate), but has 1 unresolved review comment and 0 reviewers after 52 days of inactivity. The PR is under review and awaiting maintainer feedback on the unresolved comment, which warrants keeping it open rather than closing.","scores":{"impact":60,"quick_win":33.0,"staleness":70,"complexity":45,"confidence":65},"age_days":67,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-07-08T07:44:24+00:00","updated_at":"2026-07-14T18:37:01+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":70,"complexity":45,"support_request":null,"confidence":65,"impact":60,"quick_win":33.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":12085,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"989","title":"remote-build does not exit with error upon partially successful builds","author":"zhijie-yang","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/issues/989","summary":"remote-build exits 0 even when some architectures fail on Launchpad, because _monitor_and_complete unconditionally returns 0. Unlabeled, no maintainer response, 227 days old; bug still present in current code.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is a genuine bug with a clear root cause (unconditional `return 0` at remote.py:237) and reproduction steps, but it has no labels, no assignee, and zero maintainer comments in 227 days, so it has never been triaged. The bug is still present in current code (verified: `_monitor_and_complete` returns 0 unconditionally), so it should not be closed as stale or not-a-bug. A related snapcraft issue (#4783) was fixed for a different failure mode (missing artifacts), but this partial-failure exit-code case remains unfixed.","scores":{"impact":55,"quick_win":38.5,"staleness":70,"complexity":30,"confidence":75,"support_request":5},"age_days":240,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-01-16T08:38:18+00:00","updated_at":"2026-01-16T08:38:18+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":70,"complexity":30,"support_request":5,"confidence":75,"impact":55,"quick_win":38.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":39814,"project_name":"craft-providers","source":"github","external_id":"942","title":"Feature Request for custom software mirror","author":"Kxuan","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-providers/issues/942","summary":"Feature request to add a global environment variable for custom APT mirrors in craft-providers build instances. No maintainer response or implementation yet.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"This is a new, unlabelled feature request with zero maintainer comments or labels after 141 days. No related issues or prior implementation work were found in the codebase or issue tracker. A maintainer needs to evaluate whether this enhancement aligns with craft-providers' roadmap and scope before deciding on next steps.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":20.0,"staleness":70,"complexity":50,"confidence":60,"support_request":0},"age_days":149,"labels":["Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2026-04-16T12:14:22+00:00","updated_at":"2026-04-22T02:48:21+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":70,"complexity":50,"support_request":0,"confidence":60,"impact":40,"quick_win":20.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":1741,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2396","title":"Tutorial spread tests are failing","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/2396","summary":"Tutorial spread tests failed after a craft-application change caused packed charms to lose the 'greeting' option. Root cause identified as craft-application#821; fix expected via craft-application#829 / 5.6.1. No follow-up in this issue.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer @javierdelapuente identified the root cause as craft-application#821 and @lengau confirmed the fix should come with craft-application 5.6.1 (PR #829), but the issue has no labels, no assignee, and no confirmation that the fix landed or that tutorial spread tests pass again. The repo now pins craft-application~=7.2, so the 5.6.1-era fix is almost certainly included, but nobody has verified the tutorial spread tests and closed this. Needs a maintainer to re-run the tutorial spread tests and close if green.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":35.0,"staleness":70,"complexity":30,"confidence":60,"support_request":0},"age_days":411,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-07-28T17:21:53+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:17:44+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":70,"complexity":30,"support_request":0,"confidence":60,"impact":50,"quick_win":35.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":22090,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"995","title":"Create a general migration how-to for the `uv` and `poetry` plugins","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/995","summary":"Docs task to write a tabbed how-to for migrating from the python plugin to the uv or poetry plugins, so the guide can be downstreamed into snapcraft and rockcraft. Open since ~579 days with only an auto Jira-sync comment (CRAFT-4045); no migration how-to exists in craft-parts docs yet.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no assignee, and the only comment is the autogenerated Jira-sync bot (CRAFT-4045) — no maintainer has triaged, prioritized, or acknowledged it in ~18 months. It is a well-scoped docs task (a tabbed how-to for python→uv/poetry migration) that remains unaddressed: the how-to index still lists no migration guide, and a related charmcraft PR (#2156) added a uv migration how-to downstream, suggesting the shared craft-parts doc this issue targets was never written. Needs triage to confirm whether it's still wanted or superseded by downstream docs.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":24.5,"staleness":70,"complexity":30,"confidence":65,"support_request":0},"age_days":591,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-01-29T19:17:56+00:00","updated_at":"2025-03-11T14:28:39+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":70,"complexity":30,"support_request":0,"confidence":65,"impact":35,"quick_win":24.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":39778,"project_name":"craft-providers","source":"github","external_id":"312","title":"Integration tests are slow due to fixture ordering","author":"mr-cal","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-providers/issues/312","summary":"Enhancement to reorder integration test fixtures for faster test execution by skipping early when snap installation is disabled","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is a valid enhancement suggestion about test fixture ordering that would improve test performance. The code pattern still exists in the current codebase (tests use both core22_lxd_instance and installed_snap fixtures), so the issue remains applicable. It was opened by a maintainer and has a label, indicating it has been acknowledged. However, it has been open for over 3 years with no comments or action, suggesting it's a low-priority optimization.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":34.0,"staleness":70,"complexity":15,"confidence":65,"support_request":0},"age_days":1186,"labels":["Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2023-06-14T16:14:26+00:00","updated_at":"2026-04-22T02:50:16+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":70,"complexity":15,"support_request":0,"confidence":65,"impact":40,"quick_win":34.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":2967,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"1160","title":"`charmcraft pack` does not recognize updated `charmcraft.yaml` file ","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/1160","summary":"charmcraft pack ignores updated build-snaps channel in charmcraft.yaml without a clean; tracked as a craft-parts bug (canonical/craft-parts#496, still open) awaiting a dependency patch release to pull into charmcraft.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no comments, and no maintainer response, so it lacks any sign of triage. It is a real bug (build-snaps channel changes in charmcraft.yaml don't take effect without a clean) that was moved to craft-parts#496, which is still open, so it should be kept open pending a craft-parts fix. Staleness is high (last activity 381 days ago, no engagement) but the underlying dependency issue remains unresolved, so closing would be premature.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":22.5,"staleness":70,"complexity":55,"confidence":65,"support_request":10},"age_days":1157,"labels":[],"created_at":"2023-07-13T21:54:54+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:18:20+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":70,"complexity":55,"support_request":10,"confidence":65,"impact":50,"quick_win":22.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":7290,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"4587","title":"Improvements to the PythonPlugin for core24","author":"tigarmo","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/4587","summary":"Braindump of four proposed improvements to the Python plugin for core24 (linter for bad interpreter symlinks, shebang linter, post-prime shebang rewriting, gnome extension interplay). Open, unlabelled, no maintainer response beyond a Jira sync bot; related core24 Python plugin work has since landed.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no assignee, and the only comment is the autogenerated Jira sync (CRAFT-2499), so it has never been triaged by a maintainer. It is a multi-part feature/braindump (linter + post-prime shebang rewrite + gnome extension interplay) that overlaps with already-merged core24 Python plugin work (PR #4666, #4946) but none of the four items are implemented, so it should be triaged and likely split into separate issues rather than closed.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":17.5,"staleness":70,"complexity":65,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":939,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-02-16T15:41:23+00:00","updated_at":"2025-03-13T18:36:57+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":70,"complexity":65,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":50,"quick_win":17.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":22413,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"671","title":"Define Type: grammar-array","author":"javierdelapuente","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/671","summary":"Docs request: part-properties reference shows type 'grammar-array' for keys like build-packages/stage-snaps, but no definition of that type exists. The term is gone from current docs (replaced by real types in #1055), so the request is largely moot.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The 'grammar-array' type no longer appears anywhere in the repo (grep for 'grammar-array' returns no matches); commit 87057b6d 'docs: modify types to be actual variable types (#1055)' replaced such placeholder types with real ones, and part_properties.rst now uses kitbash-field with actual types (e.g. list[str]). The underlying confusion is resolved by the docs rework, so the request is no longer applicable.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":13.5,"staleness":70,"complexity":10,"confidence":75,"support_request":40},"age_days":932,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-02-23T11:55:36+00:00","updated_at":"2025-03-11T14:29:02+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":70,"complexity":10,"support_request":40,"confidence":75,"impact":15,"quick_win":13.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":22501,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"583","title":"Documentation is missing important concepts and graphs","author":"sergiusens","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/583","summary":"Docs gap: overlays and lifecycle explanation pages lack important concepts and diagrams (referenced images missing/broken). Open since 2022, only a Jira-sync bot comment; no maintainer response or labels.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is a self-filed documentation gap by a maintainer (sergiusens) with screenshots showing missing concepts/graphs on the overlays and lifecycle pages, but it has no labels, no assignee, and the only comment is the automated Jira-sync bot (CRAFT-2944) — no human triage has occurred. The referenced docs (docs/common/craft-parts/explanation/lifecycle.rst and overlays.rst) still exist and still reference the images (lifecycle_logic.png, overlay_checksum.svg), so the gap appears unresolved and the issue remains relevant, but it needs a maintainer to confirm scope and priority.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":26.0,"staleness":70,"complexity":35,"confidence":75,"support_request":10},"age_days":1027,"labels":[],"created_at":"2023-11-20T14:17:42+00:00","updated_at":"2025-03-11T14:28:41+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":70,"complexity":35,"support_request":10,"confidence":75,"impact":40,"quick_win":26.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":6492,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"5387","title":"Warn if `--platform` is used for remote builds","author":"mr-cal","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/5387","summary":"Enhancement: make snapcraft remote-build error when --platform is passed and recommend --build-for, since --platform was dropped in 8.7.0 with no in-tool notice. Triaged by maintainer; no implementation yet.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is triaged (Status: Triaged, Type: Enhancement) and filed by maintainer mr-cal, with an internal ticket SNAPCRAFT-1013 created. The feature is not yet implemented: snapcraft/commands/remote.py only defines --build-for, so --platform on remote-build currently falls through to argparse's generic 'unrecognized arguments' error rather than the recommended helpful message pointing to --build-for. Related work: #5216 dropped --platform, and #5351 added early errors for invalid platform usage, but neither adds the specific --platform warning requested here.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":32.0,"staleness":70,"complexity":20,"confidence":75,"support_request":0},"age_days":521,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2025-04-09T13:58:58+00:00","updated_at":"2025-04-09T13:59:15+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":70,"complexity":20,"support_request":0,"confidence":75,"impact":40,"quick_win":32.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":21755,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1330","title":"Improve Pydantic schema for parts","author":"bepri","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/1330","summary":"Enhancement to model part properties (source-*, override-*, build/stage-packages/snaps) directly in the Pydantic schema instead of raw dicts. Triaged by a maintainer; no activity for ~11 months and the patternProperties workaround still exists in current code.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue carries 'Status: Triaged' and 'Type: Enhancement' labels from maintainer bepri, and the underlying work is demonstrably unaddressed: current HEAD of craft_parts/pydantic_schema.py still relies on patternProperties hacks (e.g. r\"^override\\-\": {\"type\": \"string\"}) to permit these keys as raw patterns rather than typed fields. Inactivity alone is not a close reason, and the referenced TODO's workaround remains in the code, so it stays open.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":20.0,"staleness":70,"complexity":50,"confidence":80,"support_request":0},"age_days":354,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2025-09-23T16:38:31+00:00","updated_at":"2025-09-23T16:38:40+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":70,"complexity":50,"support_request":0,"confidence":80,"impact":40,"quick_win":20.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":11853,"project_name":"debcraft","source":"github","external_id":"146","title":"[Feature] Add support for debconf config script","author":"hector-cao","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/debcraft/issues/146","summary":"Feature request for debconf config/templates deployment in debcraft. Triaged (Jira DEBCRAFT-67), and the core functionality has since been implemented via merged installdebconf helper PRs #156 and #162. No activity for about 4 months.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue's requested first step — letting developers deploy debconf config/templates files — is implemented: merged PR #156 added the installdebconf helper (copying config and templates to the package control directory) and PR #162 added token substitution, both present in current HEAD with unit tests and lifecycle wiring. The issue has had no activity since the bot's Jira-ticket comment 126 days ago, and the feature it requested is no longer missing, so it is no longer applicable.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":12.0,"staleness":70,"complexity":40,"confidence":85,"support_request":10},"age_days":138,"labels":["Status: Triaged"],"created_at":"2026-04-27T14:18:30+00:00","updated_at":"2026-04-27T19:26:16+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":70,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":85,"impact":20,"quick_win":12.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":4187,"project_name":"imagecraft","source":"github","external_id":"280","title":"Support for SBOM generation","author":"rthill91","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/imagecraft/issues/280","summary":"Feature request to add SBOM generation support (create_sbom option) to imagecraft.yaml for CPC build compliance. No labels, no comments, no maintainer engagement in 186 days. No SBOM-related code exists in the codebase.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has zero labels, zero comments, and no maintainer response in 186 days. No SBOM-related code or commits exist in the imagecraft repository (grep and git log confirm this). The related charmcraft#1013 was closed as superseded, deferring to a separate initiative, but no corresponding work has been tracked in imagecraft. A maintainer needs to assess whether this is in scope and how it relates to the broader SBOM initiative.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":20.25,"staleness":70,"complexity":55,"confidence":78,"support_request":25},"age_days":198,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-02-26T18:28:08+00:00","updated_at":"2026-02-26T18:28:08+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":70,"complexity":55,"support_request":25,"confidence":78,"impact":45,"quick_win":20.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":6389,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"5490","title":"Include git revisions for `source-type: git` parts in `manifest.yaml`","author":"MggMuggins","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/5490","summary":"Request to record git commit hashes of source-type: git parts in manifest.yaml and build logs. Triaged and acknowledged by a maintainer with a proposed 3-repo implementation plan; feature not yet implemented.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is labelled 'Status: Triaged' and maintainer @mr-cal acknowledged it on 2025-05-21 with a concrete 3-layer approach (snapcraft -> craft-application -> craft-parts plus state-manager machinery) and an internal ticket SNAPCRAFT-1134. I verified the Manifest model in snapcraft/models/manifest.py still has no per-part git commit field and no commits implement it, so the request remains valid and unimplemented despite ~15 months of inactivity.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":13.5,"staleness":70,"complexity":70,"confidence":85,"support_request":5},"age_days":485,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2025-05-15T13:01:29+00:00","updated_at":"2025-05-21T12:37:18+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":70,"complexity":70,"support_request":5,"confidence":85,"impact":45,"quick_win":13.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":2022,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2107","title":"lxc - Missing source path \"/root/snap/charmcraft/common/cache/charmcraft/charmcraft-buildd-base-v7/BuilddBaseAlias.JAMMY/pip\"","author":"mcfly722","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/2107","summary":"Charmcraft pack fails on LXD cluster when container lands on a node lacking the shared cache pip dir; maintainer offered workaround (CRAFT_SHARED_CACHE) and asked if a patch release accepting a flag would help; no reporter reply since Jan 2025.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer lengau triaged this (2025-01-24), acknowledged it as 'a fairly unexpected breakage' in an unsupported LXD cluster setup, provided a CRAFT_SHARED_CACHE workaround, and ended with an open question to the reporter ('Would it work for you if an upcoming patch release of Charmcraft would acce[pt]...') that was never answered. The issue is triaged and awaiting reporter input, so it should stay open rather than be closed as stale; closing would discard an acknowledged bug in craft-providers' shared-cache mount path.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":70,"complexity":55,"confidence":60,"support_request":30},"age_days":597,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-01-23T13:41:58+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:17:59+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":70,"complexity":55,"support_request":30,"confidence":60,"impact":40,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":39789,"project_name":"craft-providers","source":"github","external_id":"517","title":"Multipass: Use native mounts where available","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-providers/issues/517","summary":"Enhancement to use native mounts instead of sshfs for faster performance when using Multipass drivers. Awaiting maintainer triage.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is labeled 'Type: Enhancement' and clearly requests switching to `--type native` mounts for faster 9p/cifs performance over sshfs. However, it lacks maintainer acknowledgment or prioritization, requiring triage to assess feasibility and add it to the backlog.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":35.0,"staleness":70,"complexity":30,"confidence":70,"support_request":0},"age_days":926,"labels":["Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2024-02-29T18:21:51+00:00","updated_at":"2026-04-22T02:50:02+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":70,"complexity":30,"support_request":0,"confidence":70,"impact":50,"quick_win":35.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":39779,"project_name":"craft-providers","source":"github","external_id":"326","title":"fix type checking","author":"mr-cal","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-providers/issues/326","summary":"Enhancement to improve type checking with pyright strict mode and mypy. Issue is 1172 days old; project has since migrated to ty and dropped mypy/pyright.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue requests enabling strict type checking with pyright and mypy, but the project has since migrated to using \"ty\" for type checking (commit #885) and explicitly dropped mypy/pyright (commit #1007). The specific tools mentioned are no longer used, making the original request obsolete even though type checking is still being addressed with different tooling.","scores":{"impact":60,"quick_win":36.0,"staleness":70,"complexity":40,"confidence":60,"support_request":0},"age_days":1180,"labels":["good first issue","Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2023-06-20T16:25:14+00:00","updated_at":"2026-04-22T02:50:14+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":70,"complexity":40,"support_request":0,"confidence":60,"impact":60,"quick_win":36.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":1492,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2652","title":"12-factor plugin installs unnecessary package into charm's venv","author":"dimaqq","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/2652","summary":"12-factor (fastapi-framework) charm builds include extra packages in the venv (packaging, setuptools, wheel, dnspython, email_validator, idna) beyond requirements.txt; untriaged, no maintainer response, 136 days old.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"No labels, no assignee, and zero comments/maintainer interaction in 136 days, so it has not been assessed. The report is a concrete, reproducible bug with a diff of the extra venv packages, and the PythonPlugin in charmcraft/parts/plugins/_python.py (pip install --no-deps plus PIP_NO_BINARY) is the likely area to investigate, so it should be triaged rather than closed.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":20.25,"staleness":70,"complexity":55,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":152,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-04-14T00:15:49+00:00","updated_at":"2026-04-14T00:15:49+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":70,"complexity":55,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":45,"quick_win":20.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":12112,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"960","title":"Docs: In CLI messages, compose URLs with app's minor version","author":"medubelko","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/issues/960","summary":"Docs: In CLI messages, compose URLs with app's minor version","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is labeled 'Status: Triaged' and 'Type: Documentation', and the Jira bot created ticket CRAFT-4912, so it has been acknowledged. However, the current code (render_doc_url in craft_application/util/docs.py) trims to the MAJOR version by default (major_only=True), which does NOT match the issue's request to substitute the MINOR version (major.minor). PR #1140 'fix: trim documentation urls to major number' changed the behavior to major-only, which may have been a different decision than what this issue requested. The issue has not been explicitly closed or resolved, and there's ambiguity about whether the documentation policy is now major-only or minor-only. This needs human review to determine if the current major-only behavior satisfies the issue or if the minor-version request is still valid.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":28.0,"staleness":70,"complexity":30,"confidence":55,"support_request":10},"age_days":297,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Documentation"],"created_at":"2025-11-19T20:18:01+00:00","updated_at":"2025-11-20T20:28:57+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":70,"complexity":30,"support_request":10,"confidence":55,"impact":40,"quick_win":28.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":12160,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"914","title":"Allow building/packing multiple platforms in parallel.","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/issues/914","summary":"Enhancement to run managed builds for multiple build-plan platforms in parallel instead of serially. Triaged by a maintainer with an internal Jira ticket (CRAFT-4779), but unimplemented; code still loops the build plan serially.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is properly triaged (labels 'Status: Triaged', 'Type: Enhancement', filed by maintainer lengau) and the requested behavior is confirmed still absent: _run_manager_for_build_plan in craft_application/commands/lifecycle.py iterates the build plan with a plain serial for-loop calling provider.run_managed per item. It is inactive (~348 days, only a bot comment linking Jira CRAFT-4779), but not obsolete, so it should stay open rather than be closed as stale.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":11.25,"staleness":70,"complexity":75,"confidence":80,"support_request":0},"age_days":360,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2025-09-17T20:18:27+00:00","updated_at":"2025-09-17T20:21:15+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":70,"complexity":75,"support_request":0,"confidence":80,"impact":45,"quick_win":11.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":12725,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"348","title":"Rewrite default `_providers_base()` command.","author":"mr-cal","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/issues/348","summary":"Maintainer task to make Project._providers_base() translate the 'devel' base name to BuilddBaseAlias.DEVEL (and update effective_base). Open since May 2024, last activity May 2024; current code still relies on craft-providers' get_base_alias rather than an explicit devel translation.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is a maintainer-authored internal task (CRAFT-2920) with no labels, no assignee, and no maintainer response beyond the author's own follow-up comment ('Project.effective_base also needs to be updated'). It has been inactive for ~15 months. The current _providers_base() still just splits on '@' and calls get_base_alias() with no explicit devel handling, so it is not clearly resolved, but I could not confirm whether craft-providers' get_base_alias already resolves ubuntu@devel to BuilddBaseAlias.DEVEL, which would make the explicit translation redundant.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":27.0,"staleness":70,"complexity":40,"confidence":55,"support_request":5},"age_days":849,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-05-16T12:18:15+00:00","updated_at":"2025-05-23T17:27:01+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":70,"complexity":40,"support_request":5,"confidence":55,"impact":45,"quick_win":27.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":22425,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"659","title":"Docs: Document/cross-reference working directory and environment variables of override-* steps","author":"thp-canonical","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/659","summary":"Docs gap: part_properties.rst override-build/prime/stage/pull entries lack cross-references to step execution environment (working directory, CRAFT_* env vars). Unlabeled, only a Jira-sync bot comment; docs still not cross-referenced.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"No maintainer has labelled, acknowledged, or assigned this docs improvement request; the only comment is the autogenerated Jira-sync bot (CRAFT-2490). The referenced step_execution_environment.rst exists and documents CRAFT_STAGE/CRAFT_PRIME, but part_properties.rst still has no cross-reference from the override-* entries, so the gap persists and the issue remains valid but untriaged.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":25.5,"staleness":70,"complexity":15,"confidence":75,"support_request":20},"age_days":946,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-02-09T13:38:55+00:00","updated_at":"2025-03-11T14:28:38+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":70,"complexity":15,"support_request":20,"confidence":75,"impact":30,"quick_win":25.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":22164,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"921","title":"`prime` and `stage` key reference should be fleshed out","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/921","summary":"Docs gap: the `prime` and `stage` part-property reference pages lack examples and value semantics (e.g. `-` for exclusions). Filed by a maintainer, acknowledged by a second maintainer, but no labels/assignee and no doc update since.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"No labels, assignee, or PR reference the issue, and the last activity is a 2024-12-04 comment from @tmihoc expanding the scope to value descriptions, not a fix. The referenced doc page still exists in the docs tree, so the gap is likely still open, but it has sat unlabelled for ~18 months and needs a maintainer to confirm scope before work.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":29.75,"staleness":70,"complexity":15,"confidence":55,"support_request":10},"age_days":648,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-12-03T14:53:53+00:00","updated_at":"2025-03-11T14:28:45+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":70,"complexity":15,"support_request":10,"confidence":55,"impact":35,"quick_win":29.75,"has_related_links":false},{"id":11960,"project_name":"debcraft","source":"github","external_id":"39","title":"Validate maintainer names","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/debcraft/issues/39","summary":"Feature request to validate the maintainer, original-maintainer, and uploaders fields as RFC822 Name <email> format in debcraft. Open 285 days with no labels, comments, or activity; no evidence of a fix or related work.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no comments, no assignee, and no maintainer acknowledgement in 285 days, showing no sign of triage. It is a legitimate, well-scoped validation task (RFC822 parsing of three metadata fields), and there is no evidence it was implemented elsewhere or is no longer applicable, so closing as stale is not justified. Confidence is moderate because I could not inspect the current debcraft source to confirm whether validation already exists.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":19.5,"staleness":70,"complexity":35,"confidence":60,"support_request":5},"age_days":297,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-11-19T15:07:58+00:00","updated_at":"2025-11-19T15:07:58+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":70,"complexity":35,"support_request":5,"confidence":60,"impact":30,"quick_win":19.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":13176,"project_name":"craft-archives","source":"github","external_id":"118","title":"Make Pydantic models more idiomatic","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-archives/issues/118","summary":"Task to modernize pydantic models for idiomatic pydantic 2 usage and better JSON schema generation. Filed by maintainer 817 days ago; pydantic 2 upgrade (#103) and follow-up commits have largely addressed the core concerns. No labels or maintainer response beyond Jira bot sync.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The pydantic 2 upgrade (PR #103) was completed and subsequent commits (#122 eliminate pydantic warnings, #162 add fields/docstrings) have continued modernizing the models. The current code in package_repository.py uses idiomatic pydantic 2 patterns (ConfigDict, field_validator, model_validator, Annotated types, Field with description/examples), indicating the core work items from the referenced PR #103 review comments have been addressed. The issue is 817 days old with no labels or maintainer engagement beyond the Jira bot.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":15.0,"staleness":70,"complexity":40,"confidence":65,"support_request":5},"age_days":829,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-06-05T17:21:15+00:00","updated_at":"2025-05-01T16:43:45+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":70,"complexity":40,"support_request":5,"confidence":65,"impact":25,"quick_win":15.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":3207,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"919","title":"unpublish command and revision history for channel","author":"jneo8","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/919","summary":"Feature request for a per-channel revision history command and an unpublish command to downgrade a channel. Maintainer acknowledged in 2022 but it is blocked on Charmhub (snapstore-server) API support. Still unimplemented; no activity for over a year.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer facundobatista acknowledged it in Nov 2022 as 'a good idea' but explicitly stated it depends on Charmhub implementing the functionality, opening Launchpad bug 1996819 to track it. The codebase still has no unpublish command and the revisions command only lists all revisions (no per-channel history), so the feature remains unimplemented and blocked on an external dependency rather than being obsolete. Inactivity alone (~12.5 months) is not sufficient to close since the request is still applicable.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":15.75,"staleness":70,"complexity":55,"confidence":80,"support_request":10},"age_days":1409,"labels":[],"created_at":"2022-11-04T05:45:51+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:18:29+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":70,"complexity":55,"support_request":10,"confidence":80,"impact":35,"quick_win":15.75,"has_related_links":false},{"id":4694,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"981","title":"feat: don't emit url for `--profile=test`","author":"lczyk","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/pull/981","summary":"One-line change to stop `rockcraft init --profile=test` from printing a docs URL (reference/extensions/test) that does not exist. Approved by one reviewer, all CI checks passing, but inactive for ~11 months.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"The PR is approved with all CI passing, but it has been inactive for 334 days and the target file rockcraft/services/init.py has since been refactored (commit 484099f5 moved the init logic upstream), so the one-line diff may no longer apply cleanly. A maintainer needs to rebase/verify the change still works before landing.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":14.25,"staleness":70,"complexity":5,"confidence":60},"age_days":346,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-10-01T12:35:17+00:00","updated_at":"2025-10-01T17:33:52+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":70,"complexity":5,"support_request":null,"confidence":60,"impact":15,"quick_win":14.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":7141,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"4737","title":"Specifying nonstandard base results in strange error message","author":"dilyn-corner","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/4737","summary":"Snapcraft 8.x reports a misleading 'architectures keyword not supported for base foo' error when snapcraft.yaml declares an invalid base, instead of an invalid-base error. No maintainer response; only a Jira sync bot comment.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is a genuine bug report with a full reproducer (base: foo) and log output, but it has no labels, no assignee, and the only comment is the autogenerated Jira sync (CRAFT-2818) — no maintainer has assessed it. The current code still uses a pydantic discriminated union on 'base' (snapcraft/models/project.py), so the misleading error path likely persists, but I could not confirm the exact current message without running it.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":70,"complexity":40,"confidence":60,"support_request":10},"age_days":879,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-04-16T17:03:37+00:00","updated_at":"2025-03-13T18:36:47+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":70,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":60,"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":4690,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"985","title":"build(deps-dev): bump junit:junit from 4.11 to 4.13.1 in /tests/spread/rockcraft/plugin-jlink/base-2404/helloworld","author":"dependabot[bot]","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/pull/985","summary":"Dependabot bump of junit:junit from 4.11 to 4.13.1 in the jlink plugin spread test fixture pom.xml (+1/-1). Approved by 2 reviewers, one failing snap-tests CI check, inactive ~11 months; target file still pins 4.11 at HEAD.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"The PR has 2 approvals and 0 unresolved comments, and the target pom.xml still pins junit 4.11 at HEAD, so the change remains applicable and is ready to land — but the failing snap-tests check needs a maintainer to re-run or investigate before merging. The only comment (lengau: 'I manually had dependabot create this as an experiment') has had no follow-up for ~11 months, so it is moderately stale but not irrelevant, ruling out close_stale.","scores":{"impact":10,"quick_win":9.5,"staleness":70,"complexity":5,"confidence":75},"age_days":346,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-10-02T01:12:48+00:00","updated_at":"2025-10-08T12:16:11+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":true,"staleness":70,"complexity":5,"support_request":null,"confidence":75,"impact":10,"quick_win":9.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":39790,"project_name":"craft-providers","source":"github","external_id":"531","title":"Provide a way to set Multipass CPU and memory","author":"mr-cal","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-providers/issues/531","summary":"Enhancement request to allow configuring CPU and memory for Multipass instances in craft-providers. Open for 2.5 years with no implementation or assignee.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is a clearly scoped enhancement request (labeled 'Type: Enhancement') that correctly identifies hardcoded defaults in `craft_providers/multipass/_launch.py`. It should remain open in the backlog for future implementation, though it requires prioritization given its age.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":33.75,"staleness":70,"complexity":25,"confidence":75,"support_request":0},"age_days":913,"labels":["Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2024-03-13T14:28:55+00:00","updated_at":"2026-04-22T02:50:01+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":70,"complexity":25,"support_request":0,"confidence":75,"impact":45,"quick_win":33.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":5538,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"136","title":"`base: bare` + `overlay_packages` = unhelpful error message","author":"mr-cal","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/136","summary":"base: bare + overlay_packages produced an unhelpful 'No such file or directory: apt-get' error. Fixed: project validation now blocks overlays on bare bases with a clear message.","suggested_action":"close_not_a_bug","suggested_action_reason":"The reported unhelpful error is resolved: commit f8e53fd1 'project: block overlay usage with bare bases (#301)' added the _validate_base_and_overlay validator in rockcraft/models/project.py, which now raises a clear 'Part ... cannot use overlays with a bare base (there is no system to overlay)' instead of the cryptic apt-get failure. The original problem is no longer reproducible in current code.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":32.0,"staleness":70,"complexity":20,"confidence":85,"support_request":0},"age_days":1409,"labels":[],"created_at":"2022-11-03T10:25:30+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:13:00+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":70,"complexity":20,"support_request":0,"confidence":85,"impact":40,"quick_win":32.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":2024,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2105","title":"Unable to enable spread verbose with `charmcraft test`","author":"carlcsaposs-canonical","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/2105","summary":"charmcraft test cannot forward -vv to spread for verbose CI output. Custom test command was removed in #2385 in favor of the upstream spread-based command, and PR #1988 proposing a --verbose flag was closed as superseded by that migration.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is unlabelled with 0 comments and no maintainer response, so it has not been triaged. The custom test command it targets was removed in #2385 (switch to upstream), and PR #1988 for a --verbose flag was closed as superseded by that migration, so a maintainer needs to confirm whether the upstream command now supports -vv before closing or reworking it.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":28.0,"staleness":70,"complexity":30,"confidence":75,"support_request":10},"age_days":598,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-01-22T11:39:42+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:17:59+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":70,"complexity":30,"support_request":10,"confidence":75,"impact":40,"quick_win":28.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":2566,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"1562","title":"Better error messaging from store errors","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/1562","summary":"Feature request to research and improve error messages returned from the Charm Store for clarity. Open ~2.5 years, unlabelled and untriaged; last activity ~12 months ago when a user asked to be assigned to work on it.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"Filed by a maintainer but never labelled, assigned, or answered by a maintainer — the only comments are an auto-generated Jira ticket (CRAFT-2564) and a user (PietroPasotti, 2025-01-15) asking to be assigned with a concrete suggestion (\"charm `catalogue` not found in store. did you mean `catalogue-k8s`?\"). It is a valid, still-relevant enhancement that needs a maintainer to scope and prioritize rather than close.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":22.5,"staleness":70,"complexity":50,"confidence":75,"support_request":15},"age_days":926,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-02-29T19:54:07+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:18:09+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":70,"complexity":50,"support_request":15,"confidence":75,"impact":45,"quick_win":22.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":39767,"project_name":"craft-providers","source":"github","external_id":"949","title":"test: failing reproducer - no error for high UID (>65535)","author":"lengau","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-providers/pull/949","summary":"Failing test reproducer for craft-providers#259: _set_id_map() should raise ProviderError for UIDs >65535 before calling LXD. PR incomplete, no fix implemented.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"This PR adds a failing test reproducer for issue #259 (still open) but does not implement the proposed fix. The test demonstrates the bug where _set_id_map() calls lxc.config_set for UIDs >65535 instead of raising a descriptive error. The PR has been inactive for 136 days with 0 reviewers. A maintainer should review whether to implement the fix, close the issue, or request changes from the author.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":40.0,"staleness":70,"complexity":20,"confidence":70},"age_days":144,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-04-22T03:13:50+00:00","updated_at":"2026-04-22T03:13:50+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":70,"complexity":20,"support_request":null,"confidence":70,"impact":50,"quick_win":40.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":4818,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"857","title":"Missing symlinks in bare-based images built with Noble","author":"clay-lake","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/857","summary":"Bare-based rocks built with ubuntu@24.04 (Noble) build-base lose /lib* -> /usr/lib* symlinks, so executables fail at runtime with 'no such file or directory' due to missing /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2. Untriaged, no maintainer response, no labels.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no assignee, and zero comments from maintainers, so it has not been triaged. It is a real, reproducible bug (clear rockcraft.yaml and error output) where bare-based Noble rocks break at runtime because the /lib64 -> usr/lib64 symlink is missing, making the dynamic loader unavailable. The repo docs (lifecycle-layer.rst) explicitly describe this exact failure mode for Ubuntu bases, but note bare rocks 'don't need prime pruning nor usrmerge handling' — suggesting the layer-archiving symlink-preservation logic in rockcraft/layers.py may not apply to bare bases, which needs maintainer investigation.","scores":{"impact":70,"quick_win":31.5,"staleness":70,"complexity":55,"confidence":55,"support_request":10},"age_days":521,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-04-09T13:53:38+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:12:36+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":70,"complexity":55,"support_request":10,"confidence":55,"impact":70,"quick_win":31.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":4722,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"953","title":"Enable the maven plugin spread test for Ubuntu 25.10","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/953","summary":"Enable the Maven plugin spread test for Ubuntu 25.10 once a chisel release exists (ROCKS-2054). Triaged by a maintainer, but no activity since the Jira sync bot comment 367 days ago; no evidence the test has been enabled yet.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is explicitly triaged (Status: Triaged label, maintainer-authored) and is a legitimate test-coverage gap: the body states 'We're currently not testing chisel on any interim bases.' It is blocked on an external dependency (ROCKS-2054, a chisel release for Ubuntu 25.10), so it should stay open until that lands. No evidence the maven spread test has been enabled for 25.10 yet, and the repo still actively manages 25.10 spread tests (e.g. commit 8d48f0d3 'update 25.10 spread tests').","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":24.0,"staleness":70,"complexity":20,"confidence":60,"support_request":0},"age_days":379,"labels":["Status: Triaged"],"created_at":"2025-08-29T16:40:37+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-29T16:44:47+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":70,"complexity":20,"support_request":0,"confidence":60,"impact":30,"quick_win":24.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":39347,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"1086","title":"Remove BuilddBaseAlias string-match guard in handle_runtime_error","author":"tonyandrewmeyer","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/issues/1086","summary":"Issue about removing a string-match guard for BuilddBaseAlias ValueError in handle_runtime_error, blocked by craft-providers#969","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue references code 'introduced in #1082' (craft-application#1082), but that PR is still open and not merged into main. The current HEAD of craft-application/util/logging.py does not contain the string-match guard described. The issue is blocked by craft-providers#969 which is also still open. Maintainers need to decide whether to address this in PR #1082 itself or as a follow-up once both PRs are resolved.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":15.0,"staleness":70,"complexity":25,"confidence":60,"support_request":0},"age_days":102,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-06-02T11:03:02+00:00","updated_at":"2026-06-02T11:03:23+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":70,"complexity":25,"support_request":0,"confidence":60,"impact":20,"quick_win":15.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":39842,"project_name":"craft-providers","source":"github","external_id":"873","title":"Switch from external tmate to the Canonical tmate action","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-providers/issues/873","summary":"Refactor workflow files to use canonical/action-tmate instead of mxschmitt/action-tmate. Triaged, 266 days inactive.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Issue is triaged (has Type: Refactor and Status: Triaged labels) and describes a valid, scoped refactor. The workflows still use mxschmitt/action-tmate in 3 places across check-renovate.yaml and tests-weekly.yaml, so the issue remains applicable. It's a prerequisite for using self-hosted runners.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":40.0,"staleness":70,"complexity":20,"confidence":75,"support_request":0},"age_days":274,"labels":["Type: Refactor","Status: Triaged"],"created_at":"2025-12-12T16:30:25+00:00","updated_at":"2025-12-12T16:30:55+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":70,"complexity":20,"support_request":0,"confidence":75,"impact":50,"quick_win":40.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":5165,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"510","title":"Cannot easily skip `go mod download` with the `go` plugin","author":"alnvdl-work","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/510","summary":"Feature request to add an option to skip 'go mod download' in the go plugin for vendored private dependencies. 899 days old, only a bot JIRA-sync comment, no maintainer triage. The hardcoded 'go mod download all' step still exists in craft-parts go_plugin.py.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no assignee, and the only comment is an automated JIRA-sync bot (CRAFT-2621) — no maintainer has ever assessed or categorised it. The underlying problem is confirmed still present: craft-parts go_plugin.py line 137 hardcodes 'go mod download all' with no skip option. The reporter noted it belongs in snapcraft/craft-parts, adding cross-project triage complexity.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":19.5,"staleness":70,"complexity":35,"confidence":75,"support_request":25},"age_days":911,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-03-15T19:42:02+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:12:46+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":70,"complexity":35,"support_request":25,"confidence":75,"impact":30,"quick_win":19.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":21544,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1545","title":"Add integration tests for the organize keyword with parametrized YAML fixtures","author":"Copilot","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/pull/1545","summary":"Adds integration tests for the organize keyword using parametrized YAML fixtures (file-to-dir-trailing-slash, openttd-baseset, relocate-build-subdir, multi-part-organize) plus source-URL comments. Test-only, +568/-0, 12 files. CI green (CLA), 0 reviewers, no activity for 139 days.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"The PR is complete (all checklist items checked, author reports 11 tests pass and ruff clean) and CI is green, but it has had zero maintainer interaction and no updates for 139 days with 0 reviewers assigned. It is a self-contained, additive test-only change in an active area (organize has many recent commits), so it is not stale-irrelevant to close, but it has not been touched within 3 months and needs a maintainer to review and land it.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":17.5,"staleness":70,"complexity":30,"confidence":65},"age_days":151,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-04-14T17:25:19+00:00","updated_at":"2026-04-14T18:23:36+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":true,"staleness":70,"complexity":30,"support_request":null,"confidence":65,"impact":25,"quick_win":17.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":13212,"project_name":"craft-archives","source":"github","external_id":"82","title":"gnupg-related failures possibly hide their output","author":"tigarmo","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-archives/issues/82","summary":"craft-archives should log gpg command output (stderr) on failure to improve debugging; partially addressed with log=True in install_key and stderr in error messages, but key receive path still lacks debug logging","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is partially addressed: call_gpg has a log parameter used in install_key, and error messages include stderr, but _try_gpg_receive_key still doesn't use log=True. The issue remains relevant and should stay open for the remaining work.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":20.0,"staleness":70,"complexity":20,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":1199,"labels":[],"created_at":"2023-06-01T11:35:58+00:00","updated_at":"2025-05-01T16:43:46+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":70,"complexity":20,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":25,"quick_win":20.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":6154,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"5734","title":"Modifying a build-snap doesn't trigger a change","author":"dilyn-corner","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/5734","summary":"Changing a build-snap channel (e.g. node/12/stable to node/18/stable) does not trigger a rebuild of the part in snapcraft 8.11.1. A maintainer commented that craft-parts should be tracking this, but the issue remains open with no fix or follow-up.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has a single maintainer comment from 2025-09-02 stating 'Changing the build snaps should trigger a rebuild. Craft parts should be tracking this,' but no further action, labels, or fix has followed. The issue is ~12 months old with no resolution. The bug is real and reproducible, but requires investigation into whether craft-parts' build state tracking actually captures build-snap channel changes or if snapcraft is not passing them through correctly.","scores":{"impact":55,"quick_win":33.0,"staleness":70,"complexity":40,"confidence":65,"support_request":0},"age_days":380,"labels":["Type: Bug"],"created_at":"2025-08-28T18:16:40+00:00","updated_at":"2025-09-02T15:39:36+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":70,"complexity":40,"support_request":0,"confidence":65,"impact":55,"quick_win":33.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":6228,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"5655","title":"Use pydantic instead of jsonschema for legacy store","author":"bepri","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/5655","summary":"Enhancement to migrate legacy store response parsing (channel_map.py) from pinned jsonschema 2.6.0 to Pydantic models. Triaged by a maintainer with Jira ticket SNAPCRAFT-1203, but no activity for over a year; code at HEAD still uses jsonschema, so the work remains.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is labelled 'Status: Triaged' and 'Type: Enhancement', was filed by maintainer bepri, and has an internal Jira ticket (SNAPCRAFT-1203). Verification at HEAD confirms it is still applicable: pyproject.toml pins jsonschema==2.6.0 and snapcraft/store/channel_map.py still makes 7 jsonschema.validate() calls, so it is not stale-irrelevant despite 384 days without activity. Sibling issue #5654 (legacy project) was closed as abandoned, but this store-side issue remains open and valid.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":13.75,"staleness":70,"complexity":45,"confidence":80,"support_request":5},"age_days":410,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2025-07-29T17:40:13+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-12T13:24:11+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":70,"complexity":45,"support_request":5,"confidence":80,"impact":25,"quick_win":13.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":2396,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"1733","title":"Don't allow `build-base` on stable bases","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/1733","summary":"Feature request to reject build-base on stable bases in platforms charms, plus documentation. Created by maintainer 776 days ago, no labels, no maintainer response beyond Jira bot. Code still allows build-base on stable bases; not implemented.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue was created by maintainer lengau but has no labels, no assignee, and no maintainer response beyond the Jira sync bot (CRAFT-3920). The code in PlatformCharm._validate_dev_base_needs_build_base only enforces build-base for devel bases but does not reject it on stable bases, confirming the feature is unimplemented. Needs a maintainer to decide whether to implement or close.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":17.5,"staleness":70,"complexity":30,"confidence":78,"support_request":10},"age_days":788,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-07-16T16:56:34+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:18:07+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":70,"complexity":30,"support_request":10,"confidence":78,"impact":25,"quick_win":17.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":6311,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"5568","title":"build: correctly set version of dev builds","author":"bepri","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/pull/5568","summary":"Small build fix (+2/-5, 2 files) by maintainer bepri to correctly set the version of dev builds. Pending with 0 reviewers and 0 comments; last activity 360 days ago. CI mostly passing but 'build' and 'OSV-scanner' checks failing.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"The PR is a tiny, low-risk build/versioning fix by a maintainer (bepri) that is still pending review with no maintainer interaction in ~12 months. It is not clearly superseded — the current snapcraft/__init__.py still falls back to __version__ = \"dev\" when the package is not installed, and pyproject.toml now carries a setuptools-scm fallback_version = \"0.0.0\" (from #6268), so the dev-build versioning area is still active but this specific change has not been landed. Failing 'build' CI and the age warrant a maintainer re-review rather than an automatic close.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":25.5,"staleness":70,"complexity":15,"confidence":55},"age_days":449,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-06-20T20:16:42+00:00","updated_at":"2025-09-05T21:13:56+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":70,"complexity":15,"support_request":null,"confidence":55,"impact":30,"quick_win":25.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":16283,"project_name":"starflow","source":"github","external_id":"100","title":"Use the pristine-ubuntu action on hosted runners","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/starflow/issues/100","summary":"Feature request to use lengau/pristine-ubuntu-action on GitHub-hosted runners to prevent runner updates from breaking CI. Open 268 days, no labels, no comments; a related PR (starflow#101) exists but is open with failing CI.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is a maintainer-filed task (lengau) to adopt pristine-ubuntu-action on hosted runners, and a directly related PR (starflow#101) is still open, so the work is not done and the issue remains relevant. It has no labels or maintainer acknowledgement beyond the author's own filing, but closing it would be premature while the PR is pending; it needs triage/labeling and a decision on the PR.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":30.0,"staleness":70,"complexity":25,"confidence":60,"support_request":5},"age_days":281,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-12-06T08:03:24+00:00","updated_at":"2025-12-06T08:04:31+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":70,"complexity":25,"support_request":5,"confidence":60,"impact":40,"quick_win":30.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":6447,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"5432","title":"Add a linter for external symlinks","author":"mr-cal","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/5432","summary":"Feature request to add a snapcraft linter that detects external symlinks (pointing outside the snap), mirroring the review-tools sr_lint check. Triaged by a maintainer, linked to internal Jira SNAPCRAFT-1071, but no implementation progress in ~16 months.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is triaged (labels 'Status: Triaged' and 'Type: Enhancement'), authored by a maintainer, and linked to internal Jira SNAPCRAFT-1071. The linter infrastructure is actively developed (recent commits added gpu and metadata linters), so the feature remains relevant and feasible. No implementation exists in snapcraft/linters/ (only classic, gpu, library, metadata linters are registered), so it should stay open as a valid pending enhancement.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":24.75,"staleness":70,"complexity":45,"confidence":75,"support_request":10},"age_days":506,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2025-04-24T13:07:59+00:00","updated_at":"2025-04-24T13:08:16+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":70,"complexity":45,"support_request":10,"confidence":75,"impact":45,"quick_win":24.75,"has_related_links":false},{"id":6483,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"5396","title":"Export variables to testing environment","author":"cmatsuoka","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/5396","summary":"Enhancement to export SNAPCRAFT_PROJECT_DIR, SNAPCRAFT_PROJECT_VERSION, and CRAFT_ARCH_BUILD_FOR into the testing environment so test projects can reference the generated snap path. Triaged by maintainer; no implementation or PR found in repo.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is labeled 'Status: Triaged' and 'Type: Enhancement' and was created by a maintainer (cmatsuoka), indicating it has been assessed and accepted as valid work. The Jira sync bot created internal tickets (SNAPCRAFT-1018, SNAPCRAFT-1040) in April 2025, confirming active tracking. No PR or code change implementing this was found in the repository, so it remains open and unimplemented. Inactivity alone does not justify closing a triaged, accepted enhancement.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":28.0,"staleness":70,"complexity":30,"confidence":55,"support_request":0},"age_days":517,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2025-04-13T21:47:26+00:00","updated_at":"2025-04-21T19:08:55+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":70,"complexity":30,"support_request":0,"confidence":55,"impact":40,"quick_win":28.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":7418,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"4459","title":"icon 'discord.webp' must be either a .png or a .svg","author":"merlijn-sebrechts","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/4459","summary":"Snapcraft rejects .webp icons in snapcraft.yaml, requiring .png or .svg, while the Snap Store reportedly allows webp. Labeled enhancement; last activity 489 days ago with no maintainer response.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is labeled Type: Enhancement but has no maintainer acknowledgement, assignee, or triage beyond the label. The only comment (2025-04-24) is from another user noting they also cannot upload webp via the store web interface, which adds context but no resolution. The exact error string 'must be either a .png or a .svg' no longer appears in the current codebase, suggesting the validation may have changed, but no commit or PR was found that explicitly addresses webp icon support, so the current state is uncertain and needs maintainer review.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":28.0,"staleness":70,"complexity":30,"confidence":60,"support_request":10},"age_days":1018,"labels":["Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2023-11-29T17:50:39+00:00","updated_at":"2025-04-29T16:52:42+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":70,"complexity":30,"support_request":10,"confidence":60,"impact":40,"quick_win":28.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":6649,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"5230","title":"Update jsonschema","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/5230","summary":"Enhancement to update the ancient pinned jsonschema==2.6.0 dependency and fix breakages. Triaged by maintainers; the pin is still in pyproject.toml at HEAD, and the work is being pursued via follow-up issues replacing jsonschema with pydantic.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is triaged (Status: Triaged, Type: Enhancement) and a maintainer (mr-cal, 2025-05-22) confirmed the pin was only for linters and 'I'm not convinced there was a critical reason to keep the packaged pinned to such an old version.' The pin jsonschema==2.6.0 is still present in pyproject.toml at HEAD, and the chosen path forward — replacing jsonschema with pydantic — lives in open follow-up issues #5653 and #5655, so the work remains valid and unaddressed.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":15.75,"staleness":70,"complexity":55,"confidence":80,"support_request":0},"age_days":590,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2025-01-30T19:54:09+00:00","updated_at":"2025-05-22T17:44:36+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":70,"complexity":55,"support_request":0,"confidence":80,"impact":35,"quick_win":15.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":6734,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"5145","title":"snapcraft fails to launch multipass instance when multipass isn't pre-installed","author":"sed-i","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/5145","summary":"Snapcraft fails to launch a multipass VM with 'Remote snapcraft is unknown or unreachable' when multipass is installed on-demand. Maintainer triaged it as an image-server availability issue and linked craft-providers#211 for better error messaging; still open.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer mr-cal triaged it on 2024-11-19, explaining the failure occurs on non-amd64 platforms or when image servers are unavailable, and explicitly linked the open tracking issue craft-providers#211 for improving how the error is presented. The issue is acknowledged and valid, with its actionable fix tracked in an open upstream issue, so it should remain open despite ~17 months of inactivity.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":27.0,"staleness":70,"complexity":40,"confidence":80,"support_request":20},"age_days":664,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-11-18T06:35:18+00:00","updated_at":"2025-03-13T18:36:47+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":70,"complexity":40,"support_request":20,"confidence":80,"impact":45,"quick_win":27.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":2058,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2071","title":"yaml validation errors are not helpful if the file is empty","author":"PietroPasotti","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/2071","summary":"charmcraft pack gives a generic 'Invalid file: metadata.yaml' error when the file is empty (comments only), making it hard to diagnose. A maintainer acknowledged it in June 2025 and left it open as low priority; the error is still generic in current code.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer @lengau explicitly triaged this on 2025-06-13 ('I'm going to leave this open if anyone else wants to do it'), so it is acknowledged and valid, not stale-closable. I confirmed in charmcraft/preprocess.py that the empty-file case still hits the generic 'Invalid file: metadata.yaml' CraftValidationError, so the problem remains applicable. The fix is a small UX improvement (special-case empty/None YAML load), but low priority per the maintainer.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":21.25,"staleness":70,"complexity":15,"confidence":85,"support_request":10},"age_days":610,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-01-10T12:51:10+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:18:01+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":70,"complexity":15,"support_request":10,"confidence":85,"impact":25,"quick_win":21.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":6765,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"5114","title":"bash gets built with a /bin/bash that is missing the executable bit","author":"basak","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/5114","summary":"Staging bash+quilt in a classic snap yields a non-executable bin/bash because craft-parts normalize copies the symlink target from the system via shutil.copyfile, dropping the executable bit. Unfixed in craft-parts; reporter has a chmod workaround.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"A maintainer (lengau) triaged it, pinpointed the exact code (craft_parts/packages/normalize.py _try_copy_local, lines 148-157) and confirmed the root cause: shutil.copyfile copies content but not the file mode, so the executable bit is lost. The current craft-parts HEAD still uses shutil.copyfile at that line, so the bug is unfixed. It is a real, reproducible bug with a clear minimal reproducer, not a support request, so it should stay open.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":31.5,"staleness":70,"complexity":30,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":699,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-10-13T13:14:59+00:00","updated_at":"2024-10-16T16:41:10+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":70,"complexity":30,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":45,"quick_win":31.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":22598,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"485","title":"Improve logging of Apt issues in Overlays","author":"tigarmo","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/485","summary":"Overlay package install failures show only 'failed to install requested packages' with no apt error details; maintainer suggested adding apt stderr to deb.py. Unlabeled, no fix merged, last activity 538 days ago.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"A maintainer (sergiusens) explicitly triaged this in 2023-07-03, pointing to deb.py#L576 and proposing to add the failed apt command's error details, so it is acknowledged and valid. The current _install_packages still raises BuildPackagesNotInstalled with only the package list and no apt stderr, so the improvement remains unimplemented and the issue is still relevant.","scores":{"impact":55,"quick_win":33.0,"staleness":70,"complexity":40,"confidence":65,"support_request":10},"age_days":1167,"labels":[],"created_at":"2023-07-03T11:45:14+00:00","updated_at":"2025-03-11T14:29:14+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":70,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":65,"impact":55,"quick_win":33.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":7025,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"4853","title":"Snapcraft doesn't report no-op file filtering usage","author":"dilyn-corner","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/4853","summary":"Snapcraft does not warn when a stage/prime file filter (e.g. -foo) matches no files, risking unintended file inclusion. Maintainer acknowledged and redirected to craft-parts upstream; no fix implemented as of last check.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer lengau acknowledged the report on 2024-07-16 and noted it is likely an upstream craft-parts issue, constituting triage. No warning for no-op file filters exists in craft-parts' filesets.py as of the latest commit, so the issue remains valid and not outdated despite ~18 months of inactivity.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":24.0,"staleness":70,"complexity":40,"confidence":75,"support_request":10},"age_days":821,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-06-13T19:52:33+00:00","updated_at":"2025-03-13T18:37:20+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":70,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":75,"impact":40,"quick_win":24.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":7077,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"4801","title":"Doesn't tell you about conflicting files in staging before exiting the debug shell","author":"seb128","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/4801","summary":"Debug shell shows only the brief staging-conflict message, not which parts/files conflict; details only in log. Reported May 2024, one bot comment, no maintainer triage.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"No maintainer has responded, labelled, or assigned this; the only comment is the auto-generated Jira sync (CRAFT-2906). The report is a valid UX/bug complaint with a clear repro, but it has sat untriaged for ~18 months, so it needs a maintainer to assess whether the detailed conflict info should be surfaced before the debug shell.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":26.0,"staleness":70,"complexity":35,"confidence":55,"support_request":10},"age_days":856,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-05-09T15:09:06+00:00","updated_at":"2025-03-13T18:36:46+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":70,"complexity":35,"support_request":10,"confidence":55,"impact":40,"quick_win":26.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":2616,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"1512","title":"Improve error message for provider not installed.","author":"PietroPasotti","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/1512","summary":"Improve the 'Provider is required but not installed' error message shown by charmcraft pack before lxd init, to clarify what is missing and what answering y does. Maintainers acknowledged in 2024-02 and noted prerequisite craft-providers work was complete, but no fix has landed.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainers mr-cal and dstathis engaged in Feb 2024, confirming the issue is valid and noting the prerequisite craft-providers work (PR #366) was complete, making it a quick fix. However, no fix has landed in ~2 years and the original message still appears in docs, so it remains a valid but stale, low-priority UX improvement rather than something to close.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":19.5,"staleness":70,"complexity":35,"confidence":60,"support_request":10},"age_days":948,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-02-07T10:57:26+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:18:12+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":70,"complexity":35,"support_request":10,"confidence":60,"impact":30,"quick_win":19.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":22279,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"806","title":"sources module unaware of the environment","author":"upils","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/806","summary":"craft-parts sources modules run subcommands without passing the process environment, so PATH/env vars from a snap (e.g. imagecraft) are ignored and git is not found. Unlabeled, no maintainer response, last activity ~18 months ago.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is a genuine bug report (sources modules execute subcommands without env vars, breaking git detection in snap-based consumers like imagecraft) but has no labels, no assignee, and zero comments/maintainer acknowledgement, so it has not been triaged. The current code in craft_parts/sources/base.py still calls os_utils.process_run and subprocess.check_output without an env argument, so the problem appears unfixed, but no maintainer has confirmed scope or a fix plan.","scores":{"impact":55,"quick_win":24.75,"staleness":70,"complexity":55,"confidence":60,"support_request":5},"age_days":764,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-08-09T12:03:51+00:00","updated_at":"2025-03-11T14:28:27+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":70,"complexity":55,"support_request":5,"confidence":60,"impact":55,"quick_win":24.75,"has_related_links":false},{"id":5119,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"556","title":"Have the `--debug` shell inform the user which part and step failed","author":"sed-i","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/556","summary":"Feature request: have rockcraft's --debug shell tell the user which part and step failed (e.g. via PS1 or /etc/issue) for quicker troubleshooting. Open, no labels, only a Jira-sync bot comment; no maintainer response or implementation found.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is a well-scoped feature request (add part/step context to the --debug shell) but has no labels, no assignee, and the only comment is an autogenerated Jira-sync bot message (CRAFT-2831) with no maintainer acknowledgement. No code implementing PS1 or /etc/issue context was found in rockcraft or craft-parts, so it appears unaddressed and untriaged.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":24.0,"staleness":70,"complexity":40,"confidence":60,"support_request":10},"age_days":877,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-04-19T04:48:34+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:12:44+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":70,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":60,"impact":40,"quick_win":24.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":2881,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"1246","title":"K8s profiles: Add `--image` arg to `charmcraft init`","author":"sed-i","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/1246","summary":"Feature request to add a --image argument to `charmcraft init` for Kubernetes profiles, so rendered metadata.yaml uses the provided container image instead of the 'some-container-image' placeholder. Unlabelled, no maintainer response, not yet implemented.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no comments, and no maintainer acknowledgement, so it has not been triaged. The requested `--image` flag is still absent from InitCommand.fill_parser (only --name/--author/--force/--profile/--project-dir exist), and the templates still hardcode the 'some-container-image' placeholder, confirming it is unimplemented. Although the init/profiles area is still actively developed, this specific request needs a maintainer decision on scope (single vs multiple images, which files to render).","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":70,"complexity":40,"confidence":80,"support_request":0},"age_days":1103,"labels":[],"created_at":"2023-09-06T01:28:08+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:18:22+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":70,"complexity":40,"support_request":0,"confidence":80,"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":5228,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"447","title":"Consider creating and making the _daemon_ user available before running any steps","author":"merkata","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/447","summary":"Feature request to create the _daemon_ user before build steps (currently created during packaging in package.py) so it is available for part steps and has a writable home dir. No maintainer response or labels after ~2.7 years; code behavior unchanged.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no comments, and no maintainer response after ~2.7 years. Code inspection confirms the premise is still valid: rockcraft/services/package.py line 125 creates the _daemon_ user via SUPPORTED_GLOBAL_USERNAMES during the packaging phase, not before build steps. No related PRs or commits address this, so the issue remains technically relevant but has never been triaged.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":19.25,"staleness":70,"complexity":45,"confidence":60,"support_request":25},"age_days":1005,"labels":[],"created_at":"2023-12-13T07:54:01+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:12:50+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":70,"complexity":45,"support_request":25,"confidence":60,"impact":35,"quick_win":19.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":12213,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"861","title":"chore: prepare for Python 3.14","author":"lengau","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/pull/861","summary":"Adds Python 3.14 and the experimental free-threaded build to CI (+3/-2, 2 files). Open 381 days with no review or comments; all test CI jobs failing. Author notes it must wait for PyO3 0.26; sibling craft-providers#808 is still open on the same blocker.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The PR body explicitly states it 'needs to wait until PyO3 0.26 is released', and the sibling craft-providers#808 (same Python 3.14 prep, same PyO3 0.26 blocker) is still open awaiting upstream updates, so this is blocked on an external dependency rather than abandoned. The change is still applicable: qa.yaml at HEAD still only tests 3.10/3.12 with no 3.14 or freethreaded entries, and no commit in craft-application has implemented it. Inactivity alone (381 days, 0 reviews) is not sufficient to close given the stated upstream block.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":29.75,"staleness":70,"complexity":15,"confidence":72},"age_days":393,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-08-15T22:35:56+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T22:58:00+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":70,"complexity":15,"support_request":null,"confidence":72,"impact":35,"quick_win":29.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":12199,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"875","title":"Craft-application should include a schema JSON and a CI job to check the schema.","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/issues/875","summary":"Enhancement to add a schema generator and CI schema-diff job to craft-application, modeled on rockcraft's tooling, so schema-affecting changes can be flagged in changelogs. Triaged by a maintainer but no implementation progress in ~12 months.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue carries 'Status: Triaged' and 'Type: Enhancement' labels, so it has been assessed by a maintainer, and the requested work is verifiably still missing: .github/workflows/ has no schema.yaml and no commit references a schema generator or the linked CRAFT-4712 ticket. Inactivity alone (~369 days, only a bot comment) doesn't justify closing since the feature remains unimplemented and applicable to the current testcraft/partitioncraft/witchcraft layout.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":19.25,"staleness":70,"complexity":45,"confidence":80,"support_request":5},"age_days":381,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2025-08-27T15:10:56+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-27T15:11:07+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":70,"complexity":45,"support_request":5,"confidence":80,"impact":35,"quick_win":19.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":12193,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"881","title":"Rewrite the development base check to use distro-support","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/issues/881","summary":"Enhancement to replace hard-coded development base checks with distro-support for runtime validation. Triaged by maintainer but inactive for ~12 months; hard-coded DEVEL_BASE_INFOS still present in models/project.py.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is triaged (labeled 'Status: Triaged') and the maintainer acknowledged it with a comment quoting tigarmo's design rationale about the build-base: devel safeguard. The hard-coded DEVEL_BASE_INFOS in models/project.py (lines 57-62) is still present in the codebase, so the issue remains valid and not outdated. Inactivity for ~12 months is notable but the issue has not become irrelevant.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":24.0,"staleness":70,"complexity":40,"confidence":75,"support_request":10},"age_days":379,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2025-08-29T16:02:19+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-29T18:58:00+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":70,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":75,"impact":40,"quick_win":24.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":22335,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"750","title":"Reference docs: Separate \"library developer/user\" content from \"craft user\" content","author":"thp-canonical","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/750","summary":"Request to restructure craft-parts reference docs by audience (craft YAML user vs Python library user) and split 'Parts and steps' into Environment variables / Output directories. Untriaged, no labels or comments; the flat structure still exists in current docs.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is a legitimate docs restructure request but shows no maintainer engagement — no labels, no comments, no assignee — so it needs triage. I verified docs/reference/index.rst still lists the flat structure (actions, exceptions, infos, lifecycle_manager, part_properties, parts_steps, plugins, reference, changelog) and parts_steps.rst still contains the Permissions/Steps sections the issue asks to move, so the request remains applicable rather than stale.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":13.75,"staleness":70,"complexity":45,"confidence":72,"support_request":0},"age_days":828,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-06-07T08:14:22+00:00","updated_at":"2025-03-11T14:29:00+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":70,"complexity":45,"support_request":0,"confidence":72,"impact":25,"quick_win":13.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":6025,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"5879","title":"Base images store out-of-date apt package caches","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/5879","summary":"LXD base images ship stale apt package caches, so new build-packages (e.g. from a PPA) fail to install. Filed by a maintainer as a design question; craft-parts now refreshes the apt cache before installing build-packages, but no maintainer has confirmed the issue is resolved.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"No labels, no comments, and no maintainer acknowledgement in 285 days, so this has never been triaged. The core symptom appears addressed in craft-parts (commit c2836c97 'fix(deb): refresh apt cache before marking packages (#1468)' makes install_packages run apt-get update before marking, and snapcraft/parts/parts.py refreshes after installing package repositories), but the issue also raises unresolved design questions (async apt update on boot, retry-on-failure) and a workaround via a purge command (canonical/charmcraft#1042, still open and blocked by craft-providers#639), so it should not be auto-closed without a maintainer confirming the current behavior.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":22.5,"staleness":70,"complexity":55,"confidence":55,"support_request":10},"age_days":297,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-11-19T16:48:37+00:00","updated_at":"2025-11-19T16:48:37+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":70,"complexity":55,"support_request":10,"confidence":55,"impact":50,"quick_win":22.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":22486,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"598","title":"Add integration tests for namespaced partitions","author":"mr-cal","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/598","summary":"Task to extend integration tests to cover namespaced partitions after implementation PRs #595-#597. Implementation merged via #684; unit tests exist, but no dedicated namespaced-partition integration tests found. Open since 2023, last activity May 2024.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is a legitimate test-coverage task for a shipped feature (namespaced partitions, merged in #684). The author's own comment notes a missing test for the lifecycle_manager warning path, and no integration test exercising namespaced partitions was found in tests/integration. It is stale (no activity since May 2024) but not obsolete — the feature is still in use and the gap remains.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":70,"complexity":40,"confidence":60,"support_request":0},"age_days":1016,"labels":[],"created_at":"2023-12-01T18:58:34+00:00","updated_at":"2025-03-11T14:29:07+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":70,"complexity":40,"support_request":0,"confidence":60,"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":22211,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"874","title":"Craft-parts cannot parse advanced grammar in `stage` and `prime` fields","author":"mr-cal","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/874","summary":"craft-parts crashes with AttributeError when stage/prime entries use advanced grammar. Maintainer triaged: root cause is snapcraft's expand-extensions not processing grammar for prime (snapcraft#5583, open). No activity for ~18 months.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer lengau triaged this on 2024-10-09, stating 'craft-parts doesn't need to handle grammar' and 'We should probably keep this bug around though', pointing at snapcraft's expand-extensions as the real fix location. The related issue canonical/snapcraft#5583 is still open and triaged (SNAPCRAFT-1184), and the crashing RelativePathStr validator still exists in constraints.py/parts.py, so the issue remains valid despite ~18 months of inactivity.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":29.25,"staleness":70,"complexity":35,"confidence":80,"support_request":5},"age_days":703,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-10-09T14:25:31+00:00","updated_at":"2025-03-11T14:28:32+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":70,"complexity":35,"support_request":5,"confidence":80,"impact":45,"quick_win":29.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":1797,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2336","title":"Can't login in headless multipass VM with 24.04","author":"kimwnasptd","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/2336","summary":"charmcraft login crashes in headless Multipass VMs (Ubuntu 24.04) because the keyring library falls back to the null keyring, so credentials can't be stored. Reporter self-diagnosed the gap in craft-store auth.py and shared a PYTHON_KEYRING_BACKEND workaround; no maintainer has responded.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no assignee, and no maintainer response in 441 days, so it is untriaged. However, the reporter's own analysis is concrete and verified against current code: craft-store's Auth only special-cases keyring.backends.fail.Keyring (auth.py line ~204) and raises NoKeyringError, while a headless VM selects keyring.backends.null.Keyring, which is silently accepted and then fails on retrieval with CredentialsUnavailable. A prior similar report (canonical/charmcraft#672) was closed as intended behavior, so a maintainer decision is needed on whether to extend the file-keyring fallback to the null backend or improve the error message.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":27.5,"staleness":70,"complexity":45,"confidence":65,"support_request":25},"age_days":453,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-06-16T13:11:41+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:17:48+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":70,"complexity":45,"support_request":25,"confidence":65,"impact":50,"quick_win":27.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":39545,"project_name":"starbase","source":"github","external_id":"560","title":"test: add version test module","author":"medubelko","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/starbase/pull/560","summary":"Add version test module for starbase docs, mocking a planned conf.py function. Inactive for 52 days with 10 unresolved review comments.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"Related PRs (#588, #520) have addressed the underlying issue (#532) about version display in docs. The author noted the approach might need reconsideration, and the PR mocks a function that was never implemented, making the test less useful.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":24.0,"staleness":70,"complexity":20,"confidence":60},"age_days":92,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-06-13T01:40:00+00:00","updated_at":"2026-07-14T19:45:29+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":70,"complexity":20,"support_request":null,"confidence":60,"impact":30,"quick_win":24.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":2203,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"1926","title":"Docs: Rebase against newer starter pack","author":"medubelko","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/1926","summary":"Task to rebase Charmcraft docs onto the newer, modular Canonical RTD starter pack (adding Vale style checks). The rebase was completed via PR #2594 (starter pack 1.5); docs now use extension-based config with Vale in requirements and Makefile.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The core ask is done: commit 6264ff78 'build(docs)!: update canonical starter pack to 1.5 (#2594)' was merged, and the current docs/requirements.txt now lists the modular extensions (myst-parser, sphinx-tabs, etc.) plus Vale, with a `make vale` target in docs/Makefile — exactly the modular, Vale-enabled setup the issue requested. The issue is inactive (last activity 381 days ago) and the feature was implemented, so it no longer needs to stay open.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":21.0,"staleness":70,"complexity":40,"confidence":75,"support_request":0},"age_days":716,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-09-26T22:12:26+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:17:57+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":70,"complexity":40,"support_request":0,"confidence":75,"impact":35,"quick_win":21.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":2846,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"1282","title":"[refactor] Separate unit and integration tests","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/1282","summary":"Refactor to separate unit and integration tests in the tests directory. The repo now has distinct tests/unit (60 files) and tests/integration (107 files) directories, indicating the separation described in the issue has been achieved.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is a maintainer-filed refactor with no labels, no comments, and no assignee, showing no sign of triage or categorization. While the current repo layout (tests/unit and tests/integration both populated) suggests the separation goal has largely been achieved, I could not confirm a specific PR/commit that closed it, so it should be triaged to verify whether the remaining work is done or if it can be closed as completed.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":15.0,"staleness":70,"complexity":40,"confidence":60,"support_request":0},"age_days":1083,"labels":[],"created_at":"2023-09-25T16:29:57+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:18:21+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":70,"complexity":40,"support_request":0,"confidence":60,"impact":25,"quick_win":15.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":22192,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"893","title":"Java plugin should not copy all jar files","author":"vpa1977","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/893","summary":"Java plugins (ant/maven/gradle) copy every jar from the build dir into the image, including test dependencies. Maintainers discussed an opt-in fix and a 26.04 breaking change; last activity was a documentation suggestion, no implementation yet.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainers actively triaged this in Nov 2024 (lengau, tigarmo) and agreed on an opt-in approach with a planned 26.04 breaking change, but no PR or code change has landed since. The last comment (2024-11-27) proposes adding maven/ant documentation about the stage keyword/dist command, so the issue is still a live, scoped design task rather than stale or irrelevant.","scores":{"impact":55,"quick_win":13.75,"staleness":70,"complexity":75,"confidence":70,"support_request":5},"age_days":681,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-10-31T15:32:28+00:00","updated_at":"2025-03-11T14:28:48+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":70,"complexity":75,"support_request":5,"confidence":70,"impact":55,"quick_win":13.75,"has_related_links":false},{"id":6362,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"5517","title":"remote build: internal error from 400 response","author":"mr-cal","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/5517","summary":"Snapcraft remote build exposes an internal error when Launchpad returns a 400 (BadRequest) during repo push; the lazr.restfulclient.errors.BadRequest exception is not caught. Triaged as a bug, fix likely needed upstream in Craft Application.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is labelled Status: Triaged and Type: Bug, with a Jira ticket (SNAPCRAFT-1143) created, indicating it has been assessed and acknowledged by maintainers. The underlying problem — an uncaught `lazr.restfulclient.errors.BadRequest` during repo push to Launchpad — is a real bug that exposes internal errors to users. No evidence of a fix has been found in either the snapcraft or craft-application repositories, so the issue remains open and valid. The 461-day age with no further activity suggests it is moderately stale but not irrelevant.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"staleness":70,"complexity":40,"confidence":60,"support_request":10},"age_days":473,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Bug"],"created_at":"2025-05-27T13:52:40+00:00","updated_at":"2025-05-27T13:53:40+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":70,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":60,"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":22518,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"566","title":"Do not run apt update in a compulsive way","author":"sergiusens","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/566","summary":"craft-parts runs apt update compulsively during lifecycle, which fails in managed mode and is unnecessary in host mode. Reported 1050 days ago; code has since evolved (superuser guard, lru_cache, conditional refresh) but no maintainer has responded or labelled it.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"No maintainer has responded, labelled, or assigned this issue (only an auto-generated Jira-sync bot comment on 2024-05-17), so it lacks triage. The underlying behavior has partially changed since filing — refresh_packages_list is now lru_cached, guarded to superuser only (commit 425a84f1), and only invoked when install_required or for overlay packages — but the 'compulsive' refresh in the executor prologue and overlay fetch paths still exists, so it is not clearly resolved. A maintainer should confirm whether the current conditional-refresh behavior satisfies the report before deciding to keep or close.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":20.25,"staleness":70,"complexity":55,"confidence":55,"support_request":10},"age_days":1062,"labels":[],"created_at":"2023-10-16T20:00:53+00:00","updated_at":"2025-03-11T14:29:08+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":70,"complexity":55,"support_request":10,"confidence":55,"impact":45,"quick_win":20.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":6651,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"5228","title":"docs(extensions/kde-neon): change reference to use upstream repository","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/5228","summary":"Docs link in KDE Neon extensions reference still points to personal fork (alexlowe/keysmith) instead of upstream (utilities/keysmith). Labeled, acknowledged by maintainer, but no PR created in ~16 months.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The link in docs/reference/extensions/kde-neon-extensions.rst line 261 still points to alexlowe/keysmith (confirmed via grep). mr-cal confirmed in April 2025 that upstream was bumped to core24 and the reference can be updated. The fix is a trivial one-line URL change in the RST file, but no PR has been filed. Still valid and acknowledged, just needs someone to make the edit.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":14.25,"staleness":70,"complexity":5,"confidence":78,"support_request":5},"age_days":590,"labels":["Type: Documentation"],"created_at":"2025-01-30T16:51:48+00:00","updated_at":"2025-04-29T16:52:40+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":70,"complexity":5,"support_request":5,"confidence":78,"impact":15,"quick_win":14.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":22628,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"456","title":"Explain how `stage` and `prime` work in the docs","author":"ca-scribner","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/456","summary":"Docs request to explain stage/prime fileset semantics and defaults. Open 1201 days with only a bot Jira-sync comment; related issue #921 on the same topic is still open, so the gap persists.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The only comment is an automated Jira-sync (CRAFT-2929), so no maintainer has triaged or labelled it, but the request remains valid: docs/common/craft-parts/explanation/filesets.rst exists and #921 (flesh out prime/stage reference) is still open, confirming the gap was never addressed. Closing as stale would be wrong since the underlying docs gap persists; it needs a maintainer to scope/assign the doc update.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":24.0,"staleness":70,"complexity":20,"confidence":75,"support_request":10},"age_days":1213,"labels":[],"created_at":"2023-05-18T19:55:47+00:00","updated_at":"2025-03-11T14:29:15+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":70,"complexity":20,"support_request":10,"confidence":75,"impact":30,"quick_win":24.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":2610,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"1518","title":"Utility to autogenerate a terraform module","author":"sed-i","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/1518","summary":"Feature request for a charmcraft terraform command to autogenerate Terraform modules from charm metadata.yaml. Maintainer proposed jinja templates and requested stakeholder feedback in Aug 2024; no response since. Label: Needs information.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer lengau explicitly requested stakeholder feedback on the jinja-template approach on 2024-08-29, and the issue carries the 'Needs information' label. Over 11 months have elapsed with no further response from the reporter or community, exceeding the 6-month threshold. No terraform-related code or commits exist in the repository, confirming the feature was never started.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":16.0,"staleness":70,"complexity":60,"confidence":72,"support_request":10},"age_days":942,"labels":["Status: Needs information"],"created_at":"2024-02-13T14:36:15+00:00","updated_at":"2025-09-17T19:45:59+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":70,"complexity":60,"support_request":10,"confidence":72,"impact":40,"quick_win":16.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":6153,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"5735","title":"Modifying a part's `build-environment` doesn't trigger a rebuild","author":"dilyn-corner","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/5735","summary":"Bug report: modifying a part's build-environment in snapcraft.yaml does not trigger a rebuild. Maintainer mr-cal commented it is the same as #5734 and that craft-parts should manage this. Issue is open, unlabelled beyond Type: Bug, and inactive for ~1 year.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer mr-cal acknowledged the issue on 2025-09-02, confirming it is a real bug (same as #5734) and that craft-parts should handle build-environment change detection. The issue is triaged and valid, but no fix has been implemented in craft-parts yet (no relevant commits found). It should remain open until craft-parts adds build-environment to its dirty-check logic.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"staleness":70,"complexity":40,"confidence":75,"support_request":0},"age_days":380,"labels":["Type: Bug"],"created_at":"2025-08-28T18:24:02+00:00","updated_at":"2025-09-02T15:41:30+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":70,"complexity":40,"support_request":0,"confidence":75,"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":1656,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2482","title":"`charmcraft test` v4.0.1 lost `--list` support","author":"taurus-forever","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/2482","summary":"charmcraft test --list was dropped in v4.0.1 when the custom test command was replaced by upstream spread (PR #2385); reporter requests restoring the --list wrapper for CI use. No maintainer response or labels yet.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no maintainer comments, and no assignee, so it has not been triaged. The regression is real and reproducible: PR #2385 (commit b7730efc, 'feat!(test): switch from the custom test command to upstream') removed the custom test command that supported --list, and a grep for '--list' in the current source finds no such option, confirming it is still missing. Restoring a thin --list passthrough to spread is a small, well-scoped change, so the issue should be kept open and triaged rather than closed.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":26.25,"staleness":70,"complexity":25,"confidence":75,"support_request":10},"age_days":297,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-11-19T14:40:44+00:00","updated_at":"2025-11-19T14:40:44+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":70,"complexity":25,"support_request":10,"confidence":75,"impact":35,"quick_win":26.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":2037,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2092","title":"Create a reference page for the charm plugin","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/2092","summary":"Documentation task to create a reference page for the charm plugin, mirroring the uv plugin page template. Unaddressed; no charm_plugin.rst exists in docs/reference/plugins/. Project is migrating users toward the uv plugin, which may reduce priority.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is a valid documentation task created by a maintainer (lengau) with a Jira ticket (CRAFT-3958). No charm_plugin.rst exists in docs/reference/plugins/ and the plugins index doesn't list one, so it's unaddressed. However, the project is actively migrating users from the charm plugin to the uv plugin (see docs/howto/migrate-plugins/charm-to-uv.rst and init.py migration hint), which may reduce the urgency of this task. Last activity was 381 days ago (bot comment only), making it moderately stale.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":24.0,"staleness":70,"complexity":20,"confidence":75,"support_request":0},"age_days":603,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-01-18T01:53:42+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:17:43+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":70,"complexity":20,"support_request":0,"confidence":75,"impact":30,"quick_win":24.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":12760,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"313","title":"Support local key assets for package-repositories","author":"tigarmo","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/issues/313","summary":"Feature request to support local key assets for package-repositories (local dir was always /dev/null). Implemented by merged PR #317 adding an overridable _get_local_keys_path hook; issue is inactive and can be closed.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The requested capability is implemented: commit 071ad272 (PR #317, 'feat: support local keys in package-repositories') added install_package_repositories(local_keys_path=...) and the overridable LifecycleService._get_local_keys_path() hook, both present at current HEAD, so apps like Snapcraft can supply keys from snap/keys. The issue itself has no labels, no maintainer response beyond the Jira-sync bot comment (2024-04-18), and no activity for ~15 months, so it is inactive and no longer applicable.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":31.5,"staleness":70,"complexity":30,"confidence":85,"support_request":0},"age_days":877,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-04-18T13:51:41+00:00","updated_at":"2025-05-23T17:26:57+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":70,"complexity":30,"support_request":0,"confidence":85,"impact":45,"quick_win":31.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":12961,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"110","title":"docs: Add developer documentation","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/issues/110","summary":"Request for developer documentation on how to use craft-application, so migrating an app doesn't require reading source. Labeled Type: Documentation, created by a maintainer; only a bot created an internal Jira ticket (CRAFT-2604). The repo now ships a full Diátaxis docs site (how-to, reference, explanation incl. app structure), so the ask is largely addressed.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The original gap — 'moving an app to craft-application requires a lot of looking at source code' — has been substantially filled by the Diátaxis documentation now in docs/: how-to guides, a reference section (application, commands, models, services, environment-variables), and an explanation page 'Structure of a craft app' added in #910. The issue is 1046 days old with only a bot comment (CRAFT-2604) and no maintainer follow-up, and the requested developer docs have been implemented elsewhere, so it is no longer applicable.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":27.0,"staleness":70,"complexity":40,"confidence":65,"support_request":10},"age_days":1058,"labels":["Type: Documentation"],"created_at":"2023-10-20T14:20:55+00:00","updated_at":"2025-09-03T18:55:41+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":70,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":65,"impact":45,"quick_win":27.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":39835,"project_name":"craft-providers","source":"github","external_id":"932","title":"Work/ci linux multipass","author":"lengau","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-providers/pull/932","summary":"WIP PR to enable Multipass integration tests on Linux CI runners. Inactive for 169 days with 0 reviewer engagement and failing CI checks.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"This WIP PR (#932) addresses open issue #754 to enable Multipass integration tests on Linux CI. The feature remains needed (test-multipass job is still commented out in qa.yaml), but the PR has been inactive for 169 days with zero reviewer engagement. Keeping it open allows the author or others to resume work, though it may need reassessment if the feature is no longer desired.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"staleness":70,"complexity":40,"confidence":60},"age_days":177,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-03-20T01:12:32+00:00","updated_at":"2026-03-20T07:05:55+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":70,"complexity":40,"support_request":null,"confidence":60,"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":13453,"project_name":"craft-cli","source":"github","external_id":"287","title":"Document the pytest plugin","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-cli/issues/287","summary":"Request to document the craft-cli pytest plugin (init_emitter/emitter fixtures). Documentation now exists at docs/how-to/unit-test-with-emitter.rst and is linked in the how-to index, so the ask appears fulfilled.","suggested_action":"close_not_a_bug","suggested_action_reason":"The issue asks to document the pytest plugin, but docs/how-to/unit-test-with-emitter.rst now documents the init_emitter and emitter fixtures with a usage example, and it is listed in docs/how-to/index.rst. The requested documentation is in place, so the enhancement is effectively complete.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":70,"complexity":10,"confidence":75,"support_request":0},"age_days":704,"labels":["Type: Enhancement","Type: Documentation"],"created_at":"2024-10-08T13:38:44+00:00","updated_at":"2025-07-09T16:03:56+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":70,"complexity":10,"support_request":0,"confidence":75,"impact":20,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":15888,"project_name":"starbase","source":"github","external_id":"357","title":"`make docs-auto` should ignore editor temp files and stuff.","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/starbase/issues/357","summary":"Request to make `make docs-auto` ignore editor temp/swap files (vim, emacs, kate, VS Code) to avoid spurious rebuilds. Discussed by maintainers in Feb 2025 but never implemented; no activity for ~16 months.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Filed and discussed by maintainers (lengau, medubelko) with concrete suggestions on which editor patterns to ignore, so it is triaged and valid. The problem (sphinx-autobuild rebuilding on editor swap files) is still applicable and no fix has been merged, but 16 months of inactivity and low impact make it a low-priority enhancement rather than a candidate for closure.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":13.5,"staleness":70,"complexity":10,"confidence":70,"support_request":0},"age_days":568,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-02-21T19:51:34+00:00","updated_at":"2025-04-29T16:53:11+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":70,"complexity":10,"support_request":0,"confidence":70,"impact":15,"quick_win":13.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":41405,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"6357","title":"Mediate metadata creation for gadget and kernel snaps","author":"cmatsuoka","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/6357","summary":"Feature request to mediate gadget.yaml and kernel.yaml creation via craft-application 7.1.0 API. The feature has been implemented and merged in PR #6369.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The feature described in this issue was implemented and merged in PR #6369 (\"feat: mediate creation of gadget.yaml and kernel.yaml\"). The current code in snapcraft/services/package.py shows that _get_gadget_yaml and _get_kernel_yaml methods now use craft-application's mediated packaging API via _read_project_metadata_file(). Since the feature was implemented elsewhere, the issue is no longer applicable.","scores":{"impact":80,"quick_win":32.0,"staleness":70,"complexity":60,"confidence":85,"support_request":0},"age_days":57,"labels":["Status: Triaged"],"created_at":"2026-07-17T17:45:33+00:00","updated_at":"2026-07-17T17:46:01+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":70,"complexity":60,"support_request":0,"confidence":85,"impact":80,"quick_win":32.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":12638,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"435","title":"Include appropriate craft-parts environment variables when packing with `--shell`, `--debug`, etc.","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/issues/435","summary":"Feature request to expose craft-parts environment variables (e.g. $CRAFT_STAGE) in the shell launched by --shell/--debug on lifecycle commands like pack, to speed up override-script debugging. Open, unlabelled, zero comments, no activity since ~465 days ago.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is unlabelled, has zero comments, and no maintainer acknowledgement, so it has not been triaged. The feature is still relevant: _launch_shell() in craft_application/commands/lifecycle.py still just runs subprocess.run([\"bash\"]) without injecting craft-parts variables, and no commit or PR has implemented this. It is a genuine feature request (not support), but a moderate-scope improvement rather than a critical bug.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":70,"complexity":40,"confidence":75,"support_request":10},"age_days":744,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-08-29T15:18:08+00:00","updated_at":"2025-05-23T17:26:45+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":70,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":75,"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":2042,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2087","title":"Better document how platform names work","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/2087","summary":"Docs request to clarify how charmcraft platform names work, especially for multi-base platforms and when a specific name is needed vs. an arbitrary one like 'fred'. The platforms reference now states names are arbitrary and adds naming rules (PR #2590), so it appears addressed.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The platforms reference (docs/reference/platforms.rst) now states 'The platform name is an arbitrary string' (so 'fred' is fine) and provides recommended naming conventions, and PR #2590 'docs: add platform naming rules' added a dedicated Naming rules section — directly addressing the request for clearer documentation on when a specific name is required. With no maintainer engagement beyond the Jira bot comment for ~381 days and the documentation work already merged, the original problem is no longer outstanding.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":29.75,"staleness":70,"complexity":15,"confidence":62,"support_request":10},"age_days":603,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-01-17T17:34:25+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:17:45+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":70,"complexity":15,"support_request":10,"confidence":62,"impact":35,"quick_win":29.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":12500,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"573","title":"Improve API naming and scoping","author":"sergiusens","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/issues/573","summary":"Refactor proposal to rename service classes (e.g. PackageService to Package) to reduce name repetition and improve API scoping. Unlabeled, no comments, no activity for ~15 months; the naming is still unchanged in the current codebase.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no comments, and no maintainer acknowledgement (0 comments, last activity 465 days ago), so it has never been triaged. It is not a candidate for close_stale because the proposed change is still applicable: PackageService remains the public name in craft_application/services/__init__.py and is subclassed by partitioncraft, testcraft, and witchcraft, and no rename commit exists. As a breaking public-API rename it would need a deprecation cycle and coordination with downstream craft apps, which a maintainer should assess before scoping.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":15.75,"staleness":70,"complexity":55,"confidence":75,"support_request":0},"age_days":649,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-12-02T12:00:11+00:00","updated_at":"2025-05-23T17:26:37+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":70,"complexity":55,"support_request":0,"confidence":75,"impact":35,"quick_win":15.75,"has_related_links":false},{"id":12501,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"572","title":"add ability to add / update run_managed env","author":"dariuszd21","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/issues/572","summary":"Feature request to add an _extra_managed_env() hook on Application so apps can extend the environment variables passed to managed runs, which are currently hardcoded in ProviderService.run_managed. Open since Nov 2024 with no maintainer response beyond the Jira sync bot; no labels or assignee.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is a well-scoped feature request from a maintainer (dariuszd21) with a concrete code reference, but it has no labels, no assignee, and the only comment is the automated Jira sync bot (CRAFT-3740) — no human triage or acknowledgement. The hardcoded env dict still exists in ProviderService.run_managed (craft_application/services/provider.py:564-567), so the request remains valid and unimplemented. It should be triaged and categorised before any close decision.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":27.0,"staleness":70,"complexity":40,"confidence":75,"support_request":10},"age_days":652,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-11-29T18:19:22+00:00","updated_at":"2025-05-23T17:26:51+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":70,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":75,"impact":45,"quick_win":27.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":12403,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"670","title":"Document best practices for craft-application test fixtures","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/issues/670","summary":"Request to write a how-to document describing best practices for setting up and using test fixtures in craft-application based apps. No labels, no maintainer response beyond an auto-created Jira ticket (CRAFT-4298). No fixture best-practices doc found in docs/how-to yet.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no assignee, and the only comment is an auto-generated Jira sync bot message (CRAFT-4298) — no maintainer has acknowledged, categorised, or prioritised it. It is a legitimate documentation task (a pytest plugin with fixtures exists in craft_application/pytest_plugin.py, and docs/how-to has no fixture guide), so it should stay open pending triage rather than being closed as stale.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":24.0,"staleness":70,"complexity":40,"confidence":75,"support_request":0},"age_days":557,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-03-04T14:29:05+00:00","updated_at":"2025-05-23T17:26:47+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":70,"complexity":40,"support_request":0,"confidence":75,"impact":40,"quick_win":24.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":2135,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"1994","title":"Allow changing the charm entrypoint with the `python` and `poetry` plugins","author":"carlcsaposs-canonical","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/1994","summary":"Feature request to support charm-entrypoint with python and poetry plugins (originally reported as missing dispatch file). Maintainer renamed the issue and acknowledged it, but no implementation or further activity since Nov 2024.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer @lengau explicitly triaged and renamed the issue on 2024-11-18, confirming the entrypoint concern is valid and that a better warning should be added. The code confirms charm_entrypoint only exists in _charm.py, not in _python.py or _poetry.py, so the feature gap is real. However, no implementation has followed in ~13 months, making it moderately stale.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":22.5,"staleness":70,"complexity":55,"confidence":72,"support_request":20},"age_days":666,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-11-15T10:32:54+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:17:50+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":70,"complexity":55,"support_request":20,"confidence":72,"impact":50,"quick_win":22.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":12687,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"386","title":"Explicitly separate public and private APIs","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/issues/386","summary":"Feature request to explicitly separate public and private APIs in craft-application (e.g. launchpad, remote modules) to prevent every change from becoming a breaking change. No labels, no comments, no assignee; last activity 465 days ago.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no comments, and no maintainer response, so it has not been triaged. It is a legitimate architectural concern (preventing breaking changes) that would require significant refactoring and backward-compatibility decisions, but there is no evidence it has been addressed or is no longer relevant.","scores":{"impact":60,"quick_win":15.0,"staleness":70,"complexity":75,"confidence":75,"support_request":0},"age_days":788,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-07-16T17:24:03+00:00","updated_at":"2025-05-23T17:26:49+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":70,"complexity":75,"support_request":0,"confidence":75,"impact":60,"quick_win":15.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":12324,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"750","title":"internal errors for platform string","author":"mr-cal","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/issues/750","summary":"testcraft pack crashes with AttributeError when a platform value is a string instead of a dict. The bug is still present in current code; _vectorise_platforms calls data.get() without guarding against str values.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The bug is confirmed still present in the current codebase: _vectorise_platforms in craft_application/services/project.py calls data.get(\"build-for\") without checking isinstance(data, str), so a string platform value like 'my-platform: amd64' will still crash with AttributeError. The issue is labeled 'Status: Triaged' and 'Type: Bug', indicating maintainer acknowledgement. No fix commit has been found in the git history addressing this specific case. The fix is straightforward (add a str guard before calling .get()), so it should remain open for resolution.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":32.0,"staleness":70,"complexity":20,"confidence":85,"support_request":0},"age_days":502,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Bug"],"created_at":"2025-04-28T13:18:42+00:00","updated_at":"2025-06-07T00:13:39+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":70,"complexity":20,"support_request":0,"confidence":85,"impact":40,"quick_win":32.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":12352,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"721","title":"Don't follow symlinks for remote-builds","author":"mr-cal","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/issues/721","summary":"Remote builds copy the project dir via copytree without symlinks=True, so symlinks are followed and failures surface as internal errors. Fix still unimplemented in worktree.py; triaged enhancement, still referenced by open snapcraft#5384.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is triaged (Status: Triaged, Type: Enhancement, filed by maintainer mr-cal) and the linked source issue canonical/snapcraft#5384 is still open with its summary stating the fix 'belongs upstream in craft-application#721, which remains open'. I verified the pinned HEAD of craft_application/remote/worktree.py still calls copytree(self._project_dir, self._repo_dir) with no symlinks argument and no try/except, so the problem is unfixed and the issue remains relevant rather than stale.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":33.75,"staleness":70,"complexity":25,"confidence":85,"support_request":0},"age_days":522,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2025-04-08T20:58:17+00:00","updated_at":"2025-06-07T00:14:13+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":70,"complexity":25,"support_request":0,"confidence":85,"impact":45,"quick_win":33.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":13390,"project_name":"craft-cli","source":"github","external_id":"350","title":"Accept a total of `0` for a progress bar and behave well in this case.","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-cli/issues/350","summary":"Enhancement to accept total=0 in progress bars to indicate unknown total progress. Triaged by maintainer with Jira ticket CRAFT-4622, but no code changes since. printer.py still divides by bar_total without guarding against zero.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is triaged (labeled Status: Triaged, Type: Enhancement, created by maintainer lengau, Jira ticket CRAFT-4622 exists) and the underlying code in printer.py line 380 still performs bar_progress / bar_total without guarding against zero, so the enhancement remains valid. Inactivity for ~14 months is notable but the issue is not obsolete.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":17.5,"staleness":68,"complexity":30,"confidence":75,"support_request":0},"age_days":444,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2025-06-25T17:35:50+00:00","updated_at":"2025-06-25T17:37:07+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":68,"complexity":30,"support_request":0,"confidence":75,"impact":25,"quick_win":17.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":3338,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"786","title":"Improve status report to expose unregistered tracks","author":"facundobatista","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/786","summary":"Status command omits tracks that appear in channel-map but not in package.channels (unregistered tracks). Filed by maintainer facundobatista; no labels, no human response, code still exhibits the behavior.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"No labels, no assignee, and the only comment is an automated Jira-sync bot (CRAFT-3251) — no maintainer has categorised or acknowledged it. The StatusCommand code at store.py:1120 still builds the track list solely from package.channels, confirming the described gap persists, so the issue remains applicable but untriaged.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":19.25,"staleness":68,"complexity":45,"confidence":75,"support_request":10},"age_days":1550,"labels":[],"created_at":"2022-06-15T21:40:39+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:18:24+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":68,"complexity":45,"support_request":10,"confidence":75,"impact":35,"quick_win":19.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":4659,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"1016","title":"fix: preserve xattrs in layers","author":"bepri","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/pull/1016","summary":"Prototype fix preserving file xattrs in ROCK image layers via GNU tar; closes #683. Review requested changes (5 unresolved comments), CI failing on fast tests and lint; inactive ~10 months since a maintainer asked for a different approach.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The PR has been in changes_requested state with 5 unresolved review comments, and the last activity (292 days ago) was reviewer tigarmo asking the author to try a different approach ('I think we should try this AI suggestion next') — the author never responded, far exceeding the 3-month window. Failing CI (snap-tests, fast tests on jammy/noble, lint/files) plus the rejected GNU tar approach mean this specific implementation is no longer viable, though issue #683 itself remains open.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":27.0,"staleness":68,"complexity":40,"confidence":70},"age_days":317,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-10-30T21:11:25+00:00","updated_at":"2025-11-12T12:24:31+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":68,"complexity":40,"support_request":null,"confidence":70,"impact":45,"quick_win":27.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":21770,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1315","title":"Add the ability for plugins to mark their build step as clean or dirty","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/1315","summary":"Enhancement to add a Plugin method (build_is_dirty or an ActionType request) so plugins can mark their build step clean/dirty and trigger an update instead of a skip. Triaged, unimplemented, design question to cmatsuoka unanswered.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is explicitly triaged (Status: Triaged, Type: Enhancement labels) and filed by a maintainer, with an internal ticket CRAFT-4774 created and a design question posed to @cmatsuoka about returning an ActionType instead of a bool. Code inspection confirms build_is_dirty does not exist in the Plugin base class and no commit implements it, so the feature is still missing and the request remains applicable; it should stay open until the API design question is resolved.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":15.75,"staleness":68,"complexity":55,"confidence":82,"support_request":0},"age_days":360,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2025-09-17T15:07:57+00:00","updated_at":"2025-09-17T15:08:35+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":68,"complexity":55,"support_request":0,"confidence":82,"impact":35,"quick_win":15.75,"has_related_links":false},{"id":22009,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1076","title":"Give organize access to variables set during the build step #5241","author":"mr-cal","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/1076","summary":"Enhancement to allow the organize keyword to reference variables set during the build step, enabling dynamic file paths. Triaged by a maintainer 497 days ago with no further activity or implementation progress.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is triaged (Status: Triaged label) and opened by a maintainer, but the feature is not yet implemented — organize_files in part_handler.py still uses the static spec.organize_files dict with no variable substitution mechanism. The related commit #1598 only adds build pseudo-partition as a source, not dynamic path substitution, so the core request remains unaddressed.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":20.25,"staleness":68,"complexity":55,"confidence":78,"support_request":0},"age_days":509,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2025-04-21T19:47:56+00:00","updated_at":"2025-04-21T19:48:09+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":68,"complexity":55,"support_request":0,"confidence":78,"impact":45,"quick_win":20.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":11902,"project_name":"debcraft","source":"github","external_id":"97","title":"feat: add debcraft-specific rust plugin","author":"cmatsuoka","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/debcraft/pull/97","summary":"Adds a debcraft-specific Rust build plugin (+171/-1 across 4 files) to enable building Rust-based deb packages. Open 176 days with no comments, no review, and one failing CI check (OSV-scanner); feature not yet present in main.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"The PR has been open 176 days with zero comments, zero reviewer engagement, and a failing OSV-scanner security check, yet the Rust plugin feature is absent from the current codebase (no rust references in the tree or git log) and the repo remains active (recent commits #184, #170, #162), so it is not clearly superseded or irrelevant. A maintainer should review to decide whether to proceed, rebase, or close it, and to address the failing security scan.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":24.75,"staleness":68,"complexity":45,"confidence":55},"age_days":188,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-03-08T14:27:24+00:00","updated_at":"2026-03-08T14:27:24+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":68,"complexity":45,"support_request":null,"confidence":55,"impact":45,"quick_win":24.75,"has_related_links":false},{"id":12159,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"915","title":"Enforce that the build and run base are the same* base","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/issues/915","summary":"Feature request to enforce build-base must match base in the Project model, with defined exceptions (bare, devel, legacy overrides). Filed by maintainer, 1 comment, no labels, no assignee, inactive ~11 months. Code still lacks this enforcement.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"Filed by maintainer lengau with no labels, no assignee, and only one passing comment from @steinbro about snapcraft base snaps. The code in craft_application/models/project.py still only validates devel-base and bare-base cases (lines 279-313) but does not enforce the general build-base == base rule described in the issue. No PR or commit in the git history addresses this specific enforcement, so the issue remains valid but untriaged.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":68,"complexity":60,"confidence":72,"support_request":0},"age_days":358,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-09-19T15:18:47+00:00","updated_at":"2025-09-19T19:38:00+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":68,"complexity":60,"support_request":0,"confidence":72,"impact":45,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":6800,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"5079","title":"Cannot run snapcraft in docker anymore","author":"om26er","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/5079","summary":"Snapcraft crashes with SnapCtlError when run in Docker without snapd; reporter found a working Dockerfile workaround, maintainer kept it open to improve error handling. Triaged as enhancement, last activity 493 days ago.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer mr-cal explicitly stated 'I'm going to leave this issue open because we can improve the error handling' after the reporter confirmed a workaround. The issue is triaged (Status: Triaged, Type: Enhancement) and the underlying crash path (snaphelpers SnapCtlError in craft_application config) is still present in the codebase, so the error-handling improvement remains valid.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"staleness":65,"complexity":40,"confidence":75,"support_request":40},"age_days":712,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2024-09-30T15:10:08+00:00","updated_at":"2025-04-25T20:15:42+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":65,"complexity":40,"support_request":40,"confidence":75,"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":12089,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"985","title":"Support Snapcraft advanced grammar in plugin parameters?","author":"brlin-tw","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/issues/985","summary":"Feature request to support advanced grammar (on/to/else) in plugin parameters like cmake-parameters for arch-specific build flags. Triaged by maintainers in Jan 2026, confirmed valid but requiring extra work; no progress since.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue was properly triaged: lengau moved it to craft-application (where grammar is applied) and cmatsuoka confirmed on 2026-01-05 that 'plugin parameter handling will require some extra work to implement'. Code inspection confirms the limitation still exists at HEAD — process_part() skips keys not in the fixed get_grammar_aware_part_keywords() list, so dynamic plugin parameters remain unsupported. It is a valid, acknowledged enhancement with no reason to close, though ~8 months of inactivity warrants periodic re-prioritization.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":15.75,"staleness":65,"complexity":65,"confidence":80,"support_request":10},"age_days":251,"labels":["Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2026-01-05T02:40:08+00:00","updated_at":"2026-01-05T20:12:04+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":65,"complexity":65,"support_request":10,"confidence":80,"impact":45,"quick_win":15.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":22149,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"936","title":"Add an option to use `uv venv` and `uv pip` in the `python` and `poetry` plugins","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/936","summary":"Feature request to add a uv package-manager option to the python and poetry plugins, replacing venv+pip with uv venv/uv pip. Unlabeled, no comments, inactive about 18 months; still unimplemented, though a separate uv plugin now exists.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Filed by maintainer lengau as a task ('What needs to get done'), which is clear maintainer buy-in, and the request is still unimplemented: the current python_plugin.py has no package-manager property and still uses pip, and the poetry plugin is unchanged. The project remains active (recent uv plugin and poetry fixes), and the separate uv plugin (#930) is a related but different feature, not a replacement for the requested option, so the issue is still relevant.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":20.25,"staleness":65,"complexity":55,"confidence":80,"support_request":0},"age_days":639,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-12-12T21:01:15+00:00","updated_at":"2025-03-11T14:28:43+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":65,"complexity":55,"support_request":0,"confidence":80,"impact":45,"quick_win":20.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":6060,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"5831","title":"`git describe` in an `override-build` is always claiming to be dirty","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/5831","summary":"Bug where git describe --dirty in an override-build always reports the repo as dirty because spread.yaml and spread/.extension are not copied into the build directory, causing Charmcraft 4.0.0 to appear dirty. Triaged and synced to internal ticket SNAPCRAFT-1251.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is labeled Status: Triaged and Type: Bug, and was synced to internal ticket SNAPCRAFT-1251, indicating it has been assessed by maintainers. The related craft-application#942 issue with the same title is closed and was fixed by updating source ignore patterns for spread files in lifecycle.py, suggesting this is a real bug that was addressed upstream. However, since this issue in the charmcraft repo is still open and the fix may need to be backported or verified, it should remain open until confirmed resolved.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"staleness":65,"complexity":40,"confidence":75,"support_request":5},"age_days":332,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Bug"],"created_at":"2025-10-15T21:39:07+00:00","updated_at":"2025-10-15T21:39:30+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":65,"complexity":40,"support_request":5,"confidence":75,"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":2928,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"1199","title":"Utility to obtain all PYDEPS","author":"sed-i","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/1199","summary":"Request for a utility to install all charmlib PYDEPS in test environments (tox), avoiding manual repetition in requirements. Triaged as enhancement; project has since added a PYDEPS linter and uv plugin with charmlibs-pydeps dependency groups, partially addressing the need.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is triaged (labeled Status: Triaged, Type: Enhancement) and the feature request remains valid. The project has evolved with a PYDEPS linter (PR #2250) and uv plugin templates including a charmlibs-pydeps dependency group, which partially address the need but do not provide a one-command install utility for test environments. The collect_charmlib_pydeps() utility already exists, making the remaining work (an install command) relatively scoped.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":22.75,"staleness":65,"complexity":35,"confidence":75,"support_request":10},"age_days":1142,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2023-07-28T18:55:05+00:00","updated_at":"2025-09-17T19:44:33+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":65,"complexity":35,"support_request":10,"confidence":75,"impact":35,"quick_win":22.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":2137,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"1992","title":"Document how `stage-packages` differs from installing a package on the system","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/1992","summary":"Documentation task to explain how stage-packages differs from system package installation in charms and how to use operator libs instead. Blocked on stage-packages implementation (#1839, #1844), still open; no activity for over a year.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is a maintainer-authored documentation task explicitly gated on #1839 and #1844, both of which remain open and blocked by architectural work (per #1990, where a maintainer confirmed stage-packages is blocked). The feature is still absent from charmcraft's parts code (no stage_packages in source; only rockcraft tutorial YAMLs and the snap build config reference it), so the doc task is still applicable rather than obsolete, and an internal Jira ticket (CRAFT-3676) shows it is tracked. It should stay open as a blocked, valid task.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":24.5,"staleness":65,"complexity":30,"confidence":78,"support_request":0},"age_days":667,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-11-14T14:57:07+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:17:50+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":65,"complexity":30,"support_request":0,"confidence":78,"impact":35,"quick_win":24.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":4946,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"729","title":"Improve detection/setting of the PATH environment variable","author":"tigarmo","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/729","summary":"Rockcraft issue to generalize empty-PATH detection beyond bare-based rocks; set_default_path still only handles bare. Labeled good first issue, last activity 381 days ago. A contributor claimed #725 fixed it, but code confirms it's unfixed.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is triaged (labeled 'good first issue' by maintainer tigarmo) and still valid: rockcraft/oci.py set_default_path() still early-returns for any base != 'bare' (line ~410), so the requested generalization to detect an empty PATH on any base is unimplemented. The last comment (RafaelJohn9, 2025-05-19) claiming it is 'fixed in #725' is incorrect — #725 is the PR that introduced the bare-only behavior, not a fix for this generalization.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":31.5,"staleness":65,"complexity":30,"confidence":75,"support_request":10},"age_days":703,"labels":["good first issue"],"created_at":"2024-10-09T12:58:44+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:12:46+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":65,"complexity":30,"support_request":10,"confidence":75,"impact":45,"quick_win":31.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":12639,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"434","title":"Provide a way to write machine-readable output to stdout for `pack`","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/issues/434","summary":"Feature request for an opt-in machine-readable (JSON) output option for the pack command, plus docs so craft apps can expose the same for their own commands. Unimplemented at current HEAD; no labels or comments.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no comments, and no assignee, showing no sign of categorisation or prioritisation despite being filed by a maintainer. The feature is confirmed unimplemented: PackCommand in craft_application/commands/lifecycle.py still only emits human-readable 'Packed ...' messages, and no commit or related issue addresses JSON output. The project remains active (recent commits #1168, #1164), so it is not stale enough to close, but it needs triage to be prioritised.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":22.0,"staleness":65,"complexity":45,"confidence":75,"support_request":5},"age_days":745,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-08-28T16:07:38+00:00","updated_at":"2025-05-23T17:26:46+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":65,"complexity":45,"support_request":5,"confidence":75,"impact":40,"quick_win":22.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":3008,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"1118","title":"Configuration models need some typing cleanup","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/1118","summary":"Code-quality task to clean up typing in charmcraft configuration models (pydantic StrictStr usage, overrides, abstract classes), per a PR #1117 review comment. Triaged and synced to internal Jira; the criticized pattern still exists in the models.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue carries the 'Status: Triaged' label, was filed by a maintainer, and was synced to internal Jira (CHARMCRAFT-715) 47 days ago, so it is acknowledged and tracked. The criticized pattern is still present in the code (e.g. pydantic.StrictStr fields and '# type: ignore[assignment]' overrides in charmcraft/models/metadata.py), so it remains valid and not stale-irrelevant; it is a low-impact refactor rather than a user-facing bug.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":8.25,"staleness":65,"complexity":45,"confidence":80,"support_request":0},"age_days":1199,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Bug"],"created_at":"2023-06-01T17:45:34+00:00","updated_at":"2026-07-15T20:19:49+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":65,"complexity":45,"support_request":0,"confidence":80,"impact":15,"quick_win":8.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":12146,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"928","title":"Write documentation describing how to use reusable documentation snippets","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/issues/928","summary":"Docs task: write a how-to for app developers on including Craft Application's reusable documentation snippets (docs/common). Open 334 days, no comments; snippets are actively used but the how-to is still missing.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The feature is still in use and undocumented: docs/common/README.md explains the include/replace pattern, and six files (e.g. docs/how-to/build-remotely.rst, docs/reference/models/platforms.rst) consume these snippets, with recent additions like #1144 and #1012. No commit or page has yet written the requested how-to, so the task remains valid; it is a low-complexity docs task that should stay open rather than be closed as stale.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":20.0,"staleness":65,"complexity":20,"confidence":80,"support_request":0},"age_days":346,"labels":["Type: Documentation"],"created_at":"2025-10-01T16:21:29+00:00","updated_at":"2025-10-01T16:21:29+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":65,"complexity":20,"support_request":0,"confidence":80,"impact":25,"quick_win":20.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":3213,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"913","title":"Add `charmcraft fmt` command","author":"sed-i","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/913","summary":"Feature request for a charmcraft format command to apply opinionated YAML formatting to metadata.yaml, actions.yaml, config.yaml, and charmcraft.yaml. Triaged by maintainer who created a forum post for consensus; no implementation yet after over a year of inactivity.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer facundobatista triaged this in Nov 2022, agreed on naming it 'format' with a --diff option, and created a forum post to gather community consensus on formatting rules. The feature remains relevant and unimplemented (verified no format command exists in the codebase), but has been inactive for over a year pending that external consensus. Not stale-irrelevant, just deprioritized.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":65,"complexity":40,"confidence":70,"support_request":5},"age_days":1420,"labels":[],"created_at":"2022-10-24T06:37:41+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:18:30+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":65,"complexity":40,"support_request":5,"confidence":70,"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":13355,"project_name":"craft-cli","source":"github","external_id":"385","title":"Provide a way to handle multiple simultaneous sources of information","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-cli/issues/385","summary":"Enhancement request to support multiple simultaneous information sources (e.g., parallel builds) in the emitter/printer, enabling streaming from remote builds and parallel local builds. Triaged by maintainer, synced to internal ticket CRAFT-4778, no activity for ~11 months.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is explicitly triaged (labels: Status: Triaged, Type: Enhancement) and synced to internal ticket CRAFT-4778, so it has maintainer acknowledgement and should remain open. No evidence the feature was implemented: code still has single-source assumptions (e.g., printer.py's 'parallelism' comment and messages.py teardown note), and no related PRs or commits address multiple simultaneous sources. Inactivity is ~11 months, but the underlying capability is still absent, so closing as stale would be premature.","scores":{"impact":55,"quick_win":13.75,"staleness":65,"complexity":75,"confidence":60,"support_request":0},"age_days":360,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2025-09-17T20:20:23+00:00","updated_at":"2025-09-17T20:21:03+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":65,"complexity":75,"support_request":0,"confidence":60,"impact":55,"quick_win":13.75,"has_related_links":false},{"id":39290,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"6301","title":"Using export-login on  a credentials file that already exist fails with 'internal error'","author":"mbeijen","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/6301","summary":"snapcraft export-login fails with PermissionError when the output file already exists, preventing re-runs with the same filename.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is unlabelled, has zero maintainer comments, and no assignee after 73 days. The bug report is clear with reproducible steps, but requires maintainer assessment to confirm it's still relevant and prioritize a fix.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":26.25,"staleness":65,"complexity":25,"confidence":75,"support_request":5},"age_days":82,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-06-23T09:56:14+00:00","updated_at":"2026-06-23T09:56:14+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":65,"complexity":25,"support_request":5,"confidence":75,"impact":35,"quick_win":26.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":21784,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1301","title":"Chisel integration test failing on ppc64el","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/1301","summary":"Chisel lifecycle test fails on ppc64el with a digest mismatch cutting the ca-certificates_data slice. Test is now skipped on ppc64el (workaround in #1279); the underlying upstream chisel problem remains unresolved. Open ~11 months, no comments.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The test failure was worked around rather than fixed: commit 4193bd04 (PR #1279) added a ppc64el skipif to test_chisel_lifecycle that explicitly cites this issue as the reason, and no ppc64el/chisel fix appears in the repo history. The root cause is an upstream chisel digest mismatch on ppc64el that craft-parts cannot fix, so the issue remains a valid tracking item for removing the skip once chisel is fixed.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":11.25,"staleness":65,"complexity":55,"confidence":80,"support_request":0},"age_days":362,"labels":["Type: Bug"],"created_at":"2025-09-15T23:01:50+00:00","updated_at":"2025-09-15T23:02:09+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":65,"complexity":55,"support_request":0,"confidence":80,"impact":25,"quick_win":11.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":39228,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"1262","title":"Rockcraft is unable to build rock with \"devel\" build-bases","author":"zhijie-yang","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/1262","summary":"Rockcraft fails to build rocks with `build-base: devel` due to `ValueError: '26.10' is not a valid BuilddBaseAlias`. Unlabeled and inactive.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue reports a clear `ValueError` when using `build-base: devel` because the `26.10` version ID is not recognized by the `BuilddBaseAlias` enum. It currently lacks labels and maintainer interaction, so it requires triage to confirm the dependency version and prioritize the fix.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":40.0,"staleness":65,"complexity":20,"confidence":80,"support_request":0},"age_days":87,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-06-18T08:18:45+00:00","updated_at":"2026-06-18T08:18:45+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":65,"complexity":20,"support_request":0,"confidence":80,"impact":50,"quick_win":40.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":21839,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1246","title":"npm plugin: Support `disable-parallel` parameter","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/1246","summary":"Feature request to add the disable-parallel part property to the npm plugin. Labeled Needs information; maintainers await a real-world use case before implementing. No activity for ~12 months; part of a family of similar open issues for other plugins.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is explicitly triaged (Type: Enhancement, Status: Needs information) and the body itself frames it as a tracked low-priority enhancement: 'extremely low priority until someone shows us a real-world use case.' The npm plugin still lacks the property at HEAD (verified in npm_plugin.py), so it remains applicable rather than obsolete; it is one of ten sibling tracking issues for the same property across plugins, so closing it would lose the tracking. It should stay open but remain low priority until a use case appears.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":10.5,"staleness":65,"complexity":30,"confidence":85,"support_request":5},"age_days":375,"labels":["Type: Enhancement","Status: Needs information"],"created_at":"2025-09-02T15:26:41+00:00","updated_at":"2025-09-02T15:26:41+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":65,"complexity":30,"support_request":5,"confidence":85,"impact":15,"quick_win":10.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":4716,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"959","title":"Allow Custom Build Contexts","author":"clay-lake","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/959","summary":"Feature request to allow rockcraft to pull source from outside the project context directory, enabling multi-rock repositories to share common source. Acknowledged by maintainer as cross-craft concern, linked to charmcraft#1079. No implementation exists; last activity ~11.5 months ago.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer @lengau acknowledged the issue on 2025-09-10, noting it is 'relevant for all crafts' and linking to charmcraft#1079, which shows it has been triaged and considered. The feature does not exist in the codebase (no build-root or custom context support found), and the use case (multi-rock repos sharing source) remains valid. Inactivity is notable but the issue is still relevant and not superseded.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":65,"complexity":60,"confidence":75,"support_request":10},"age_days":368,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-09-09T11:57:58+00:00","updated_at":"2025-09-11T12:27:03+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":65,"complexity":60,"support_request":10,"confidence":75,"impact":45,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":21754,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1331","title":"Merge similar error types","author":"bepri","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/1331","summary":"Cleanup task to merge near-duplicate error types InvalidSourceOption and InvalidSourceOptions in craft_parts/sources/errors.py. Labeled Status: Triaged; both types still exist and are raised in sources/base.py, so the work remains unaddressed.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is labelled 'Status: Triaged' (maintainer-acknowledged) and the underlying problem is verifiably still present: both error classes remain in craft_parts/sources/errors.py and are still raised separately in sources/base.py, with no commit having merged them. It is a legitimate, well-scoped cleanup task, not stale-irrelevant, so it should stay open; complexity is moderate because the types are part of the public API and downstream consumers may catch them.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":9.0,"staleness":65,"complexity":40,"confidence":85,"support_request":0},"age_days":354,"labels":["Status: Triaged"],"created_at":"2025-09-23T16:40:08+00:00","updated_at":"2025-09-23T16:40:18+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":65,"complexity":40,"support_request":0,"confidence":85,"impact":15,"quick_win":9.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":3205,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"921","title":"`snaphelpers` getting snap config can fail when `snapd` is unavailable`","author":"mr-cal","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/921","summary":"snaphelpers calls in charmcraft's configure hook can raise unhelpful errors when snapd is unavailable. Maintainer acknowledged as low priority (2024-08); only the configure hook still uses snaphelpers directly. Code still lacks the try/except fix.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer @lengau triaged this as low priority (2024-08-16), noting only the configure hook still uses snaphelpers directly. The code in charmcraft/snap.py still only catches UnknownConfigKey, not SnapCtlError/AttributeError, so the issue remains valid. It is a small, well-scoped fix that should stay open for eventual completion.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":13.5,"staleness":65,"complexity":10,"confidence":78,"support_request":5},"age_days":1408,"labels":[],"created_at":"2022-11-04T10:16:14+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:18:22+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":65,"complexity":10,"support_request":5,"confidence":78,"impact":15,"quick_win":13.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":39481,"project_name":"craft-providers","source":"github","external_id":"969","title":"BuilddBaseAlias enum lookup raises bare ValueError — should raise a typed error","author":"tonyandrewmeyer","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-providers/issues/969","summary":"Untriaged issue requesting BuilddBaseAlias enum lookup raise a typed CraftError instead of bare ValueError for better downstream error handling.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no maintainer comments, and no assignee after 94 days — it has not yet been triaged. The report is well-structured with a clear proposed fix (catch ValueError at checks.py:109/115 and re-raise as a typed error), and it blocks canonical/craft-application#1086, so it warrants maintainer review rather than automatic closure.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":37.5,"staleness":65,"complexity":25,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":102,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-06-02T11:03:14+00:00","updated_at":"2026-06-02T11:03:14+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":65,"complexity":25,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":50,"quick_win":37.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":39454,"project_name":"craft-platforms","source":"github","external_id":"233","title":"refactor: Replace Python 3.10 workaround for enum value checking","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-platforms/issues/233","summary":"Refactor craft-platforms to replace a Python 3.10 try/except workaround for enum checking with a direct generator expression.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is a clear, actionable refactoring request authored by a maintainer, but it currently lacks labels, assignees, or maintainer comments indicating it has been triaged or prioritized.","scores":{"impact":10,"quick_win":9.0,"staleness":65,"complexity":10,"confidence":80,"support_request":0},"age_days":89,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-06-15T17:13:10+00:00","updated_at":"2026-06-15T17:13:10+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":65,"complexity":10,"support_request":0,"confidence":80,"impact":10,"quick_win":9.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":39398,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1613","title":"uv: Support workspace packages arguments","author":"pedro-avalos","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/1613","summary":"Feature request to add a `uv-packages` property to the `uv` plugin for specifying workspace packages during sync. Untriaged and inactive for 88 days.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"This is a feature request for the `uv` plugin to support workspace package arguments. It has no labels, no assignee, and no maintainer comments after 88 days, indicating it has not yet been triaged or prioritized by the project maintainers.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":35.0,"staleness":65,"complexity":30,"confidence":80,"support_request":0},"age_days":96,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-06-08T14:37:17+00:00","updated_at":"2026-06-08T20:43:38+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":65,"complexity":30,"support_request":0,"confidence":80,"impact":50,"quick_win":35.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":39858,"project_name":"craft-providers","source":"github","external_id":"792","title":"Create an inner class for LXD variables","author":"bepri","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-providers/issues/792","summary":"Enhancement to create an inner class or dataclass for LXD variables to reduce parameter lists in launcher.py methods","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"This is a valid enhancement request from a maintainer (bepri) to improve code clarity by consolidating the large parameter lists in _create_instance and launch methods. The issue remains relevant as the code still has excessive parameters (evidenced by the noqa PLR0913 comment). A recent comment from @cmatsuoka suggests an alternative dataclass approach, indicating ongoing discussion about implementation.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":32.5,"staleness":65,"complexity":35,"confidence":70,"support_request":0},"age_days":396,"labels":["Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2025-08-12T14:23:46+00:00","updated_at":"2026-08-28T16:18:35+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":65,"complexity":35,"support_request":0,"confidence":70,"impact":50,"quick_win":32.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":39389,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1604","title":"feat: handle snap components in stage-snaps","author":"bepri","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/pull/1604","summary":"Handles snap components in stage-snaps. Marked as draft with 2 approvals but 3 unresolved comments. Blocked by pending snapd changes per maintainer feedback.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The PR is explicitly marked as draft and blocked by external snapd changes (snapd PR #17435 and Jira ticket PF-6858). Maintainer @mr-cal stated on 2026-08-25 that they should wait for snapd progress before continuing this PR, making it appropriate to keep open despite the 94-day age.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":11.25,"staleness":65,"complexity":75,"confidence":75},"age_days":102,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-06-02T19:22:42+00:00","updated_at":"2026-08-25T16:30:34+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":65,"complexity":75,"support_request":null,"confidence":75,"impact":45,"quick_win":11.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":6394,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"5485","title":"Provide option to filter stage packages","author":"kubiko","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/5485","summary":"Feature request to add exclusion syntax (e.g. leading dash) to stage-packages so users can filter out unwanted stage packages, motivated by a 70% snap size increase when migrating from core22 to core24. Triaged, acknowledged by a maintainer, and tracked in internal ticket SNAPCRAFT-1132; not yet implemented.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is labelled Status: Triaged / Type: Enhancement, a maintainer (mr-cal) explicitly endorsed it ('I like this idea and agree that the stage-packages key would benefit from improvements'), and an internal ticket SNAPCRAFT-1132 was created. Code inspection confirms the feature is still absent: stage_packages is still Grammar[list[str]] in snapcraft/models/project.py with no exclusion syntax, so the request remains valid and should stay open despite ~13 months of inactivity.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":22.5,"staleness":65,"complexity":55,"confidence":85,"support_request":10},"age_days":489,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2025-05-12T08:15:50+00:00","updated_at":"2025-05-20T13:39:54+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":65,"complexity":55,"support_request":10,"confidence":85,"impact":50,"quick_win":22.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":38982,"project_name":"imagecraft","source":"github","external_id":"347","title":"services/pack: build partitions as files, inject via dd","author":"mwhudson","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/imagecraft/pull/347","summary":"Replaces losetup-based partition building with dd-based approach to enable unprivileged container support. Author addressed reviewer concerns about performance and exotic filesystems, but PR has been inactive for ~100 days with 0 reviewers and failing spread tests.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"The PR proposes a significant architectural change to enable running imagecraft in unprivileged containers by replacing losetup-based partition building with a dd-based approach. The author responded to reviewer concerns about performance and exotic partition formats, but the PR has been inactive for ~100 days with 0 reviewers assigned and failing spread tests. Maintainer review is needed to decide whether to continue development, request changes, or close.","scores":{"impact":65,"quick_win":16.25,"staleness":65,"complexity":75,"confidence":65},"age_days":111,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-05-24T20:17:06+00:00","updated_at":"2026-05-26T21:45:57+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":65,"complexity":75,"support_request":null,"confidence":65,"impact":65,"quick_win":16.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":21851,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1234","title":"cmake plugin: Support `disable-parallel` parameter","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/1234","summary":"Feature request to add disable-parallel support to the cmake plugin, mirroring the autotools plugin. Triaged with 'Needs information' label, waiting for a real-world use case. 363 days old, no comments, feature not yet implemented.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is triaged (labeled 'Status: Needs information') and the cmake plugin still lacks disable-parallel support (confirmed in cmake_plugin.py line 112 which unconditionally uses -j{parallel_build_count}). The maintainer explicitly requested a real-world use case, and while none has been provided in 363 days, the feature request remains valid and the sibling issues for other plugins (make, qmake, meson, scons) are also still open, indicating this is a tracked but low-priority enhancement.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":17.0,"staleness":65,"complexity":15,"confidence":78,"support_request":10},"age_days":375,"labels":["Type: Enhancement","Status: Needs information"],"created_at":"2025-09-02T15:23:38+00:00","updated_at":"2025-09-02T15:23:38+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":65,"complexity":15,"support_request":10,"confidence":78,"impact":20,"quick_win":17.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":22436,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"648","title":" Provide better errors for failures to clear the apt cache","author":"mr-cal","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/648","summary":"Request to wrap the apt-cache cleanup in craft_parts/packages/apt_cache.py with try/except to emit a clearer error when the cache cannot be removed (e.g. destructive mode run with sudo then without). Unlabeled, no maintainer response; related snapcraft issue closed as superseded by craft-application#974.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"No labels, no assignee, and the only comment is the Jira-sync bot (CRAFT-2937), so no maintainer has assessed it. The referenced block (shutil.rmtree of cache_etc_apt_path in _populate_stage_cache_dir) is still unguarded in current code, though craft-application#974 now warns on non-root destructive runs, mitigating the original trigger.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":24.0,"staleness":65,"complexity":20,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":953,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-02-02T20:31:09+00:00","updated_at":"2025-03-11T14:29:05+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":65,"complexity":20,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":30,"quick_win":24.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":39644,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"1101","title":"remote-build: status indicator blocks interactive input","author":"steinbro","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/issues/1101","summary":"remote-build blocks interactive SSH input with a progress indicator when connecting to Launchpad for private projects without configured SSH keys.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no assignee, and no formal maintainer triage. While @mr-cal commented 72 days ago suggesting a potential fix approach ('we're considering running a simple ssh command before the upload to probe the connection'), this is discussion rather than acknowledgment or prioritization. The issue remains unlabelled and unassigned after 72 days of inactivity.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":29.25,"staleness":65,"complexity":35,"confidence":75,"support_request":15},"age_days":80,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-06-24T18:58:21+00:00","updated_at":"2026-06-24T19:10:12+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":65,"complexity":35,"support_request":15,"confidence":75,"impact":45,"quick_win":29.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":39784,"project_name":"craft-providers","source":"github","external_id":"430","title":"Improve integration tests","author":"mr-cal","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-providers/issues/430","summary":"Enhancement proposal to restructure integration tests, either by migrating to spread or reorganizing existing tests to address disk space exhaustion on GitHub runners.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"This is a valid enhancement from maintainer mr-cal about improving test infrastructure to address disk space exhaustion on GitHub runners. The issue has no comments and hasn't been actively worked on, but the underlying problem (integration tests consuming 99% of runner disk space) is likely still relevant. The complexity is high as it involves architectural decisions (spread migration vs. reorganization) and requires planning.","scores":{"impact":60,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":65,"complexity":70,"confidence":60,"support_request":10},"age_days":1058,"labels":["Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2023-10-20T16:32:12+00:00","updated_at":"2026-04-22T02:50:08+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":65,"complexity":70,"support_request":10,"confidence":60,"impact":60,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":2035,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2094","title":"Create a reference page for the reactive plugin","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/2094","summary":"Docs task to add a dedicated reference page for the reactive plugin, mirroring the uv plugin page, and replace the inline reactive section in the charmcraft.yaml reference. Open, unlabelled, last touched by a Jira-sync bot 381 days ago; no page exists yet.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The reactive plugin is still actively supported (recent commits like #2678 'feat: reactive support for 26.04' and #2763 'fix reactive spread tests'), and docs/reference/plugins/index.rst still lists only python/poetry/uv/dump/nil plugins with no reactive entry, so the gap persists. It's a maintainer-fileed, well-scoped docs task with an internal Jira ticket (CRAFT-3959), so it should stay open rather than be closed as stale.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":15.0,"staleness":65,"complexity":25,"confidence":80,"support_request":0},"age_days":603,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-01-18T01:54:44+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:17:42+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":65,"complexity":25,"support_request":0,"confidence":80,"impact":20,"quick_win":15.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":4209,"project_name":"imagecraft","source":"github","external_id":"258","title":"Support using gadget.yaml volumes as a source for imagecraft.yaml volume definitions","author":"alderic-coroir","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/imagecraft/issues/258","summary":"Enhancement to let imagecraft.yaml import volumes from the gadget snap's meta/gadget.yaml instead of duplicating the layout. Triaged and discussed; a maintainer noted snapd reads the gadget directly, so overrides risk a disconnect. No work planned this cycle.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is explicitly triaged (labels 'Status: Triaged', 'Type: Enhancement') and has substantive maintainer engagement: lengau asked for 'a broad variety of opinions on this and its possible pitfalls' and dilyn-corner responded with a concrete design concern that imagecraft 'cannot modify what the gadget states' since snapd reads it directly, suggesting a snapd change might be needed. It is not stale-irrelevant (feature unimplemented, concern unresolved) and not a support request, so it should stay open pending that design decision, though it is deprioritized ('unlikely to work on this this cycle').","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":10.0,"staleness":65,"complexity":75,"confidence":70,"support_request":0},"age_days":239,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2026-01-16T14:04:53+00:00","updated_at":"2026-01-19T15:01:08+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":65,"complexity":75,"support_request":0,"confidence":70,"impact":40,"quick_win":10.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":22147,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"938","title":"cmake: use the cmake snap by default","author":"soumyaDghosh","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/pull/938","summary":"Adds an option to source cmake from the snap and makes the cmake snap the default in the cmake plugin. Maintainers rejected the default change as breaking; author unresponsive for ~6 months. No CI, no approvals.","suggested_action":"close_not_mergeable","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer tigarmo explicitly stated 'Changing the default to use the snap is a no-go, this will for sure break existing projects', and sergiusens agreed, so the backward-incompatible default change is expressly unacceptable. The discussion pivoted to different approaches (cmake-deps detection, core26 fallback) that would be a separate change, and the author has not responded to the feedback in ~6 months (last activity 2024-12-20). The current cmake_plugin.py still hardcodes the cmake deb, confirming nothing was landed.","scores":{"impact":55,"quick_win":24.75,"staleness":65,"complexity":55,"confidence":80},"age_days":637,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-12-14T16:34:09+00:00","updated_at":"2026-03-07T14:12:57+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":65,"complexity":55,"support_request":null,"confidence":80,"impact":55,"quick_win":24.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":1920,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2212","title":"Resources/containers reference info for extensions","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/2212","summary":"Documentation gap: extension reference pages omit the resources and containers keys that extensions add to charmcraft.yaml, plus an optional collapsed expand-extensions example. No comments, labels, or assignee; docs have since been updated for other extensions but this gap remains.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue was filed by a maintainer (lengau) with no labels, comments, or assignee, and no maintainer has acknowledged or categorised it since. The extension reference pages (e.g. django-framework-extension.rst) still lack dedicated resources/containers sections, and recent commits like #2459 and #2708 show the docs are actively maintained, so the gap is still relevant. It is a straightforward documentation task, not stale or irrelevant.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":22.5,"staleness":65,"complexity":25,"confidence":70,"support_request":0},"age_days":555,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-03-06T18:37:43+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:17:38+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":65,"complexity":25,"support_request":0,"confidence":70,"impact":30,"quick_win":22.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":5026,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"649","title":"docker run in the tutorial will fail","author":"cpaelzer","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/649","summary":"Hello-world tutorial docker run command fails on fresh systems due to Docker socket permissions. Acknowledged by maintainer, linked to broader non-root doc testing issue #651. Problem still present in current code.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer cjdcordeiro acknowledged the issue and linked it to the broader tracking issue #651 (Spread should run doc tests with nonroot user), which is still open. The hello-world tutorial at docs/tutorial/code/hello-world/task.yaml still contains 'docker run --rm hello:latest exec hello -t' without sudo, confirming the problem persists. The fix is blocked by the architectural decision in #651 about how to handle non-root doc testing.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":25.5,"staleness":65,"complexity":15,"confidence":75,"support_request":10},"age_days":781,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-07-24T09:46:45+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:13:01+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":65,"complexity":15,"support_request":10,"confidence":75,"impact":30,"quick_win":25.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":12411,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"662","title":"Add reference docs for the pydantic models","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/issues/662","summary":"Request to add reference documentation for craft-application's Pydantic models, including reasons for defaults. Partially addressed: project.rst and platforms.rst exist in docs/reference/models/, but full scope (all models, default rationale) appears incomplete. Inactive ~12 months; project remains very active.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is a valid documentation enhancement filed by a maintainer (lengau) and partially addressed via PR #845 (project.Project model docs) and the platforms.rst page, but the broader scope of documenting all Pydantic models with rationale for defaults remains open. The project is very active with frequent docs commits, so the issue is still relevant. No clear reason to close beyond inactivity.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":22.75,"staleness":65,"complexity":35,"confidence":75,"support_request":10},"age_days":564,"labels":["Type: Enhancement","Type: Documentation"],"created_at":"2025-02-25T17:56:02+00:00","updated_at":"2025-09-03T19:08:46+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":65,"complexity":35,"support_request":10,"confidence":75,"impact":35,"quick_win":22.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":1916,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2216","title":"Add showing of `sha256` digest on `charmcraft resource-revisions`","author":"hloeung","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/2216","summary":"Feature request to display the sha256 digest in `charmcraft resource-revisions` output (needed for `juju attach-resource` downgrades). Unlabelled, no maintainer response, and the current code still omits the digest even though the store model already provides it.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"No labels, no assignee, and zero comments from maintainers in 538 days, so it has never been triaged. The request is still valid: `ListResourceRevisionsCommand.run` in charmcraft/application/commands/store.py only emits revision/created-at/size/architectures, while the craft-store `CharmResourceRevision` model (used in tests/integration/commands/test_resource_revisions.py with `sha256=\"\"`) already carries the digest, so it's a small, well-scoped enhancement worth keeping open for triage.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":32.0,"staleness":65,"complexity":20,"confidence":80,"support_request":5},"age_days":551,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-03-11T00:32:13+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:17:55+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":65,"complexity":20,"support_request":5,"confidence":80,"impact":40,"quick_win":32.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":4697,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"978","title":"feat: add support for SPDX license expressions","author":"lczyk","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/978","summary":"Feature request to allow SPDX license expressions in the license field; rockcraft's spdx_lookup validation only accepts single IDs. Maintainers pointed to craft-application's license_expression-based SpdxLicenseStr as the fix path. Open, unimplemented.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer tigarmo (2025-11-12) confirmed craft-application 'has the code to validate the license' via SpdxLicenseStr/license_expression, and rockcraft's own spdx_lookup-based _validate_license (project.py) is the blocker. It is a valid, scoped enhancement with a clear fix path, so it should stay open pending implementation.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":22.0,"staleness":65,"complexity":45,"confidence":80,"support_request":10},"age_days":352,"labels":["Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2025-09-25T19:07:28+00:00","updated_at":"2025-11-12T15:35:53+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":65,"complexity":45,"support_request":10,"confidence":80,"impact":40,"quick_win":22.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":7127,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"4751","title":"Use `ld` from the base snap for library linting","author":"mr-cal","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/4751","summary":"Enhancement to use the base snap's `ld --list` instead of the host `ldd` for library linting, fixing spurious unknown symbol warnings on core24. Triaged by a maintainer with an internal ticket; code TODO still references it and it remains unfixed.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is triaged (labels 'Status: Triaged', 'Type: Enhancement'), authored by a maintainer, and tracked internally (CRAFT-2847). The fix is clearly not done: snapcraft/elf/_elf_file.py:444 still has 'TODO: use `ld` from the base snap (#4751)' next to the host ldd call, and the newer open issue #6332 shows the same spurious-warning problem persisting on core26. Inactivity for ~16 months is notable, but the issue remains applicable, so it should stay open.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":22.5,"staleness":65,"complexity":50,"confidence":80,"support_request":5},"age_days":873,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2024-04-22T16:51:30+00:00","updated_at":"2025-04-24T16:04:17+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":65,"complexity":50,"support_request":5,"confidence":80,"impact":45,"quick_win":22.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":2041,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2088","title":"Docs: Demark links to Ops library","author":"medubelko","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/2088","summary":"Docs task to re-add 'Ops |' prefix to intersphinx links pointing to the Ops library. Partially done: many links now have the prefix, but some (e.g. manage-libraries.rst, configure-web-app-charm.rst) still lack it. No labels or maintainer triage; only bot comments. Author is a maintainer.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue lacks labels, has no maintainer response (only two Jira-sync bot comments from 2025-01-17), and no assignee, meeting the needs_triage criteria. However, the problem is still live: grep shows 21 :external+ops:ref: hits, several without the 'Ops |' prefix (e.g. manage-libraries.rst:42, configure-web-app-charm.rst lines 40–127). Commits 'docs: align ops links formatting' (98a58a19, dbd6675f) suggest partial work was done, but the issue was never formally triaged or closed.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":12.75,"staleness":65,"complexity":15,"confidence":65,"support_request":5},"age_days":603,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-01-17T19:01:13+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:17:45+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":65,"complexity":15,"support_request":5,"confidence":65,"impact":15,"quick_win":12.75,"has_related_links":false},{"id":13894,"project_name":"craft-grammar","source":"github","external_id":"31","title":"If architecture after to is an array, it is not matched corretly","author":"dariuszd21","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-grammar/issues/31","summary":"to clause with multiple selectors (e.g. to amd64,arm64) never matches because selectors use AND logic, not OR. Maintainers confirmed this is by design but documentation is misleading. mr-cal committed to fixing docs in June 2024; no evidence of completion since.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainers mr-cal and dilyn-corner actively discussed the issue and confirmed the AND behavior is by design, with mr-cal explicitly stating 'I am happy to fix it and will try to make the document less misleading.' No labels or assignee were set, and there is no evidence the documentation fix was completed in the 486 days since last activity, so the documentation concern likely remains open.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":28.0,"staleness":65,"complexity":30,"confidence":60,"support_request":15},"age_days":808,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-06-27T00:34:28+00:00","updated_at":"2025-05-02T15:27:55+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":65,"complexity":30,"support_request":15,"confidence":60,"impact":40,"quick_win":28.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":39609,"project_name":"imagecraft","source":"github","external_id":"362","title":"Declarative way to add users and groups","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/imagecraft/issues/362","summary":"Enhancement request for declarative user/group creation in images. Triaged but no activity for 72 days. Suggested implementation: a plugin that creates users and groups in a part.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"This is a valid, triaged enhancement request with no evidence of being implemented elsewhere or becoming irrelevant. The maintainer (lengau) suggested a concrete implementation approach (a plugin that creates users/groups in a part), and the issue has the 'Status: Triaged' label. While 72 days of inactivity is notable, inactivity alone is insufficient to close per guidelines, and there's no indication this feature is no longer applicable.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":65,"complexity":60,"confidence":70,"support_request":0},"age_days":80,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2026-06-24T15:26:36+00:00","updated_at":"2026-06-24T15:28:55+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":65,"complexity":60,"support_request":0,"confidence":70,"impact":45,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":41174,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2789","title":"test(spread): add core26 venv/bin/python reproducer for uv dispatch script bug","author":"copilot-swe-agent","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/pull/2789","summary":"Adds a spread test reproducing core26 venv/bin/python symlink removal bug; 52 days old, 0 reviewers, slow CI tests failing","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"The PR adds a test for a core26 venv/python symlink issue but has received zero maintainer engagement in 52 days and has failing slow CI tests. A maintainer needs to assess whether the underlying bug still exists, whether the test is relevant, and whether the CI failures are expected or indicate a problem with the test itself.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":29.75,"staleness":65,"complexity":15,"confidence":45},"age_days":59,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-07-15T16:26:02+00:00","updated_at":"2026-08-13T00:34:24+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":65,"complexity":15,"support_request":null,"confidence":45,"impact":35,"quick_win":29.75,"has_related_links":false},{"id":39788,"project_name":"craft-providers","source":"github","external_id":"508","title":"LXD Provider requires a local installation of LXD on macOS","author":"jat-canonical","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-providers/issues/508","summary":"Enhancement to support remote LXD clusters for non-Linux hosts. Acknowledged by maintainer with existing proof-of-concept but pending UX and application-side implementation.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer @mr-cal acknowledged the request on 2024-02-27, confirmed craft-providers has most of the work implemented, and explained remaining UX/architectural challenges (e.g., cross-architecture filtering). The issue is a valid enhancement with maintainer buy-in, so it should remain open for future implementation.","scores":{"impact":65,"quick_win":18.2,"staleness":65,"complexity":72,"confidence":75,"support_request":10},"age_days":947,"labels":["Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2024-02-09T06:42:36+00:00","updated_at":"2026-04-22T02:50:03+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":65,"complexity":72,"support_request":10,"confidence":75,"impact":65,"quick_win":18.2,"has_related_links":false},{"id":4617,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"1058","title":"docs: referencing Pebble documentation","author":"asanvaq","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/pull/1058","summary":"Updates the Pebble link in docs/explanation/pebble.rst from the GitHub repo to the official Pebble documentation page, plus minor spelling fixes. 2-line change, unreviewed, CI mostly green with one unrelated snap-tests failure.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"The PR is inactive (last activity 203 days ago, 0 comments, no reviewers) but the change is still applicable: docs/explanation/pebble.rst at HEAD still contains the old link '.. _Pebble: https://github.com/canonical/pebble' and issue #737 remains open. As a trivial 2-line docs fix it needs only a quick maintainer review; the failing snap-tests check is implausible for a .rst-only diff and likely flaky.","scores":{"impact":10,"quick_win":9.5,"staleness":65,"complexity":5,"confidence":85},"age_days":267,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-12-19T15:53:18+00:00","updated_at":"2026-02-09T20:37:04+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":65,"complexity":5,"support_request":null,"confidence":85,"impact":10,"quick_win":9.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":6665,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"5214","title":"Please add revisions of `stage-snaps` to `manifest.yaml`","author":"jhenstridge","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/5214","summary":"Enhancement to annotate manifest.yaml with stage-snaps revisions (like stage-packages already does). Acknowledged by maintainer as valid but non-trivial, requiring craft-parts changes. No implementation yet; last activity ~16 months ago.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer @mr-cal explicitly endorsed the idea ('I think this is a great idea') and outlined the required work (craft-parts pull-step revision capture + new API), confirming it is a valid, scoped enhancement. It carries the Type: Enhancement label and has no reason to be closed — it is simply unimplemented and blocked on cross-project (craft-parts) changes.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":16.0,"staleness":65,"complexity":60,"confidence":75,"support_request":10},"age_days":599,"labels":["Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2025-01-22T06:16:47+00:00","updated_at":"2025-04-29T16:52:41+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":65,"complexity":60,"support_request":10,"confidence":75,"impact":40,"quick_win":16.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":2757,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"1371","title":"Output a nice error message when docker breaks lxd","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/1371","summary":"Feature request to print a helpful error message when Docker breaks LXD (suggesting iptables -P FORWARD ACCEPT), instead of just timing out. Created by maintainer lengau, no labels, no comments, no assignee, 1028 days old.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue lacks labels, has no assignee, and has zero comments or maintainer engagement beyond the author (who is a maintainer). The underlying problem (Docker breaking LXD networking) is still relevant — the iptables fix is applied in CI (spread.yaml:377, .github/workflows/spread-docs.yaml:63) but the application itself still just times out without a helpful message. No evidence it was deprioritized or resolved.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":26.25,"staleness":65,"complexity":25,"confidence":72,"support_request":10},"age_days":1040,"labels":[],"created_at":"2023-11-07T14:37:31+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:18:18+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":65,"complexity":25,"support_request":10,"confidence":72,"impact":35,"quick_win":26.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":2001,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2131","title":"add explanation chart for each charm plugin","author":"lucabello","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/2131","summary":"Feature request to add explanatory charts/diagrams for each charm plugin to improve understanding of build internals. Last activity 381 days ago when a maintainer pinged another for opinion; no labels, no decision, no follow-up. Plugin docs now have text-based 'How it works' sections but no visual charts.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue was informally acknowledged when @lengau asked @medubelko for their opinion 381 days ago, but it was never labelled, assigned, or given a decision. Plugin documentation has since evolved (uv_plugin.rst now has a 'How it works' section with numbered steps), which partially addresses the underlying need for clarity, but the specific request for visual charts remains unaddressed. A maintainer needs to decide whether charts add enough value over the existing textual explanations to warrant the effort.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":16.25,"staleness":65,"complexity":35,"confidence":70,"support_request":15},"age_days":589,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-01-31T13:36:51+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:17:41+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":65,"complexity":35,"support_request":15,"confidence":70,"impact":25,"quick_win":16.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":13371,"project_name":"craft-cli","source":"github","external_id":"369","title":"fix: filter other commands by name instead of type","author":"jonathan-conder","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-cli/pull/369","summary":"Fixes 'See also' help section incorrectly omitting parent commands by comparing command names instead of using isinstance. 396 days old, CI green, 0 reviewers, author asked an unanswered question about the test.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"The bug is still present in craft_cli/helptexts.py line 479 (isinstance check on command classes), CI is fully green, and the fix is a trivial 8-line change. However, 0 reviewers have engaged in 396 days and the author's question about whether the regression test is worthwhile (2025-08-05) remains unanswered, so a maintainer needs to review and address that before merging.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":65,"complexity":10,"confidence":78},"age_days":409,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-07-31T05:13:42+00:00","updated_at":"2025-11-03T10:08:10+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":65,"complexity":10,"support_request":null,"confidence":78,"impact":20,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":6200,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"5686","title":"Add more fields to the metadata linter","author":"mr-cal","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/5686","summary":"Enhancement to add icon, common-id, and desktop fields to the metadata linter. Triaged by maintainer 388 days ago; no further activity. Fields still absent from current linter code.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is labeled 'Status: Triaged' and 'Type: Enhancement', authored by a maintainer, and the requested fields (icon, common-id, desktop) are confirmed absent from the current _FIELDS list in metadata_linter.py. While 388 days of inactivity is notable, the feature remains unimplemented and the issue has not become irrelevant, so it should stay open.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":19.25,"staleness":65,"complexity":45,"confidence":72,"support_request":5},"age_days":400,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2025-08-08T13:18:42+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-08T13:19:01+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":65,"complexity":45,"support_request":5,"confidence":72,"impact":35,"quick_win":19.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":40730,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"6333","title":"Last published version on PyPI is very old","author":"astrojuanlu","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/6333","summary":"Issue about PyPI publishing being outdated; asks if publishing will resume or project should be marked archived. No maintainer response, no labels, 57 days inactive.","suggested_action":"close_not_a_bug","suggested_action_reason":"This is a project management question about PyPI publishing strategy, not a code bug. The reporter asks whether to resume publishing or mark the project archived — a decision for maintainers, not something fixable in code. With no maintainer engagement after 57 days and no labels, this is best closed as a support/usage question rather than a bug.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":24.0,"staleness":65,"complexity":20,"confidence":75,"support_request":80},"age_days":64,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-07-10T14:38:11+00:00","updated_at":"2026-07-10T14:38:11+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":65,"complexity":20,"support_request":80,"confidence":75,"impact":30,"quick_win":24.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":39810,"project_name":"craft-providers","source":"github","external_id":"884","title":"Enable Ubuntu minimal builds","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-providers/issues/884","summary":"Enhancement request to support ubuntu-minimal images for the lxd backend. No maintainer response in 136 days. BuilddBase class already describes itself as supporting 'Ubuntu minimal buildd images', creating ambiguity about whether this is already addressed.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"No maintainer response or comments in 136 days, and the issue lacks clarity on whether this is already addressed by existing buildd support. The BuilddBase class in craft_providers/bases/ubuntu.py is described as 'Support for Ubuntu minimal buildd images', and lxd remotes for buildd images exist in lxd/remotes.py. A maintainer needs to clarify whether this enhancement has already been implemented or if it requests something different from buildd support.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"staleness":65,"complexity":40,"confidence":50,"support_request":10},"age_days":270,"labels":["Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2025-12-16T19:47:45+00:00","updated_at":"2026-04-22T02:48:26+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":65,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":50,"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":41919,"project_name":"imagecraft","source":"github","external_id":"382","title":"docs: add Imagecraft 0.2 release notes","author":"lengau","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/imagecraft/pull/382","summary":"Adds Imagecraft 0.2 release notes, navigation, overlay-step docs, and imagecraft.yaml reference update for override-overlay. 45 days inactive, 0 reviewers, 2 unresolved review comments, 2 failing CI checks.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"The PR has 2 unresolved review comments but no maintainer engagement for 45 days, and CI is failing on lint and OSV-scanner checks. A maintainer review is needed to either address the feedback, request updates from the author, or close the PR if no longer relevant.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":21.25,"staleness":65,"complexity":15,"confidence":70},"age_days":52,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-07-22T16:49:00+00:00","updated_at":"2026-07-22T16:51:16+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":65,"complexity":15,"support_request":null,"confidence":70,"impact":25,"quick_win":21.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":1646,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2492","title":"Charmcraft crashes with internal error when uploading outside of project directory","author":"morphis","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/2492","summary":"charmcraft upload crashes with RuntimeError('Project not configured yet.') when run outside a project directory; regression in 4.x from charmlibs warning feature. PR #2497 closed as fix.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"PR #2497 ('Fix upload crash when run outside project directory') is closed and explicitly addresses this exact RuntimeError by adding configuration checks for the unconfigured project service. The issue is 275 days old with only a bot comment as activity, and the fix has been merged, making the issue no longer applicable.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":28.0,"staleness":65,"complexity":30,"confidence":70,"support_request":0},"age_days":290,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Bug"],"created_at":"2025-11-26T15:20:19+00:00","updated_at":"2025-12-03T18:19:14+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":65,"complexity":30,"support_request":0,"confidence":70,"impact":40,"quick_win":28.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":46481,"project_name":"fetch-service","source":"github","external_id":"605","title":"fix: refactor service shutdown to prevent races","author":"cmatsuoka","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/fetch-service/pull/605","summary":"Refactors service shutdown to prevent race conditions in fetchctl socket server, HTTP proxy, and control API server. Approved by 2 reviewers with 0 unresolved comments; most CI passing.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"PR has 2 approvals and 0 unresolved review comments, indicating it's ready to merge. However, last activity was 60 days ago, suggesting it may have slipped through the cracks. A maintainer should review and land it or request any final changes.","scores":{"impact":70,"quick_win":38.5,"staleness":65,"complexity":45,"confidence":75},"age_days":131,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-05-04T15:11:57+00:00","updated_at":"2026-07-11T01:04:40+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":65,"complexity":45,"support_request":null,"confidence":75,"impact":70,"quick_win":38.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":39811,"project_name":"craft-providers","source":"github","external_id":"895","title":"Add a LXD VM provider","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-providers/issues/895","summary":"Enhancement request to add a LXD VM provider that creates virtual machines instead of containers, enabling loop device support for Imagecraft. No discussion in 136 days.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"This is a clear enhancement request from a maintainer (lengau) with a well-defined rationale (loop device support for Imagecraft), but it has zero comments and no activity in 136 days. It needs to be assessed for priority, implementation scope, and whether it aligns with current project roadmaps before work begins.","scores":{"impact":60,"quick_win":27.0,"staleness":65,"complexity":55,"confidence":65,"support_request":10},"age_days":228,"labels":["Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2026-01-27T17:27:41+00:00","updated_at":"2026-04-22T02:48:25+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":65,"complexity":55,"support_request":10,"confidence":65,"impact":60,"quick_win":27.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":39815,"project_name":"craft-providers","source":"github","external_id":"894","title":"docs: odd Explanation tree/page rendering","author":"steinbro","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-providers/issues/894","summary":"Documentation rendering bug: network error section appears in page but not sidebar due to missing toctree entry","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is a valid documentation bug — the 'Failure to properly execute commands that depend on network access' section exists in docs/explanation/index.rst but is not included in the toctree directive, causing it to render in the page body but not appear in the sidebar navigation. However, with 0 maintainer comments and no activity for 136 days, it has not yet been triaged or acknowledged.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":19.0,"staleness":65,"complexity":5,"confidence":75,"support_request":0},"age_days":232,"labels":["Type: Bug"],"created_at":"2026-01-23T13:23:47+00:00","updated_at":"2026-04-22T02:48:07+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":65,"complexity":5,"support_request":0,"confidence":75,"impact":20,"quick_win":19.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":39060,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"1082","title":"fix(errors): render user-config and base-alias failures as structured errors","author":"tonyandrewmeyer","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/pull/1082","summary":"Converts pydantic ValidationError and base-alias lookup failures into structured CraftValidationError with user-friendly messages instead of raw tracebacks. Approved by 2 reviewers but has 11 unresolved review comments and 53 days of inactivity.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"The PR has 2 approvals and passing CI, but 11 unresolved review comments and 53 days of inactivity indicate it needs author response. The recent comment from @bepri requesting author review confirms maintainer engagement is ongoing. The change is small (+118/-2 lines, 3 files) and improves user experience by replacing raw tracebacks with structured error messages.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":33.75,"staleness":65,"complexity":25,"confidence":75},"age_days":110,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-05-26T07:19:47+00:00","updated_at":"2026-07-13T18:13:30+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":65,"complexity":25,"support_request":null,"confidence":75,"impact":45,"quick_win":33.75,"has_related_links":false},{"id":6276,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"5604","title":"`snapcraft try` for `core24`","author":"PsikoBlock","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/5604","summary":"Implement `snapcraft try` for core24 snaps, a known core24 migration gap. Triaged (Jira SNAPCRAFT-1185); a maintainer noted in July 2025 it's now implementable after Craft Application 5.0 refactoring, but the command still raises FeatureNotImplemented.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is triaged (Status: Triaged, Type: Enhancement), acknowledged by maintainer @mr-cal who stated it is 'now possible to implement in Snapcraft' after Craft Application 5.0 refactoring, and tracked in Jira SNAPCRAFT-1185. The feature is still unimplemented at HEAD: TryCommand._run in snapcraft/commands/lifecycle.py unconditionally raises FeatureNotImplemented for all bases, and the core22-to-core24 migration guide still lists it as a known issue, so it remains relevant despite ~13.5 months of inactivity.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":15.75,"staleness":65,"complexity":65,"confidence":80,"support_request":10},"age_days":431,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2025-07-08T12:39:06+00:00","updated_at":"2025-07-21T13:40:42+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":65,"complexity":65,"support_request":10,"confidence":80,"impact":45,"quick_win":15.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":2472,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"1657","title":"Document permissions, channels, etc. in Charmhub login","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/1657","summary":"Docs improvement: expand charmcraft login docs to explain required permissions and how to specify channels. The how-to now lists all permissions and explains --channel/--permission options; a minor nit (naked track in the example) from a maintainer comment may remain.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The core request is largely addressed: docs/howto/manage-the-current-charmhub-user.rst now contains a full permission list (package-manage-*, account-*, etc.) and explains --channel/--permission/--ttl, added via the docs refactor (#2010). However, tim-hm's comment flagged that the example uses a naked track (--channel=edge) rather than a full channel, which still appears at line 101, so a small doc fix remains and the issue is not explicitly closed.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":24.0,"staleness":65,"complexity":20,"confidence":60,"support_request":10},"age_days":877,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-04-18T15:04:13+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:18:03+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":65,"complexity":20,"support_request":10,"confidence":60,"impact":30,"quick_win":24.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":5950,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"5966","title":"Add ruby spread tests","author":"mr-cal","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/5966","summary":"Request to add core22/core24 spread tests for the new craft-parts Ruby plugin. Work is done: merged PR snapcraft#5976 added the ruby-hello spread tests, which are present in the repo's build-and-run-hello suites.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The requested core22/core24 Ruby spread tests were added by merged PR snapcraft#5976 ('test: add Ruby plugin spread tests', which resolves this issue), and the current repo contains the ruby-hello snap and SNAP/ruby wiring in tests/spread/plugins/craft-parts/build-and-run-hello/task.yaml and tests/spread/core24-suites/plugins/build-and-run-hello/task.yaml. The only activity is an autogenerated Jira-sync bot comment from 223 days ago, so the request is no longer applicable.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":25.5,"staleness":65,"complexity":15,"confidence":88,"support_request":0},"age_days":235,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2026-01-20T22:29:46+00:00","updated_at":"2026-01-20T22:31:14+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":65,"complexity":15,"support_request":0,"confidence":88,"impact":30,"quick_win":25.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":2040,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2089","title":"Charmcraft terminology glossary","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/2089","summary":"Documentation task to create a Charmcraft terminology glossary (Base, Platform, Charm vs .charm file). Filed by a maintainer 591 days ago, no labels, no assignee, no maintainer response beyond a Jira sync bot. No glossary exists in the docs tree.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue was filed by maintainer lengau 591 days ago but has no labels, no assignee, and the only comment is an auto-generated Jira sync bot message (2025-01-17). No glossary file exists in the docs tree (confirmed by grep and git log), and no related commits or PRs address it. It needs a maintainer to assess whether the terminology inconsistency it references (PR #2080 discussion) is still relevant and to prioritize or close it.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":17.5,"staleness":65,"complexity":30,"confidence":75,"support_request":5},"age_days":603,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-01-17T19:29:06+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:17:44+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":65,"complexity":30,"support_request":5,"confidence":75,"impact":25,"quick_win":17.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":39372,"project_name":"craft-grammar","source":"github","external_id":"188","title":"Test on Python 3.14 and Ubuntu 26.04 (Resolute)","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-grammar/issues/188","summary":"Request to add Python 3.14 and Ubuntu 26.04 to CI testing. Unlabelled, no maintainer response, inactive for 93 days. Identical issues exist in craft-archives#224 and craft-providers#970.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is unlabelled with no maintainer comments or assignee after 93 days. It's a straightforward CI enhancement request (identical issues exist in craft-archives#224 and craft-providers#970), but requires triage to prioritize and assign. Current qa.yaml only tests ubuntu-22.04 and ubuntu-24.04.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":38.25,"staleness":65,"complexity":15,"confidence":75,"support_request":10},"age_days":101,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-06-03T15:41:11+00:00","updated_at":"2026-06-03T15:41:11+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":65,"complexity":15,"support_request":10,"confidence":75,"impact":45,"quick_win":38.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":38950,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2707","title":"Charmcraft confuses the current directory with the project directory when both has a charmcraft.yaml","author":"gycsaba96","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/2707","summary":"Regression in charmcraft 4.2.1 where 'charmcraft pack -p' fails if both CWD and project directory contain charmcraft.yaml. Untriaged, 101 days old.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is well-structured with clear reproduction steps and identifies a regression between versions 4.0.1 and 4.2.1, but it has no labels, no assignee, and zero maintainer comments after 101 days. It requires maintainer assessment to verify if it is a duplicate of a recent fix (e.g., PR #2600) or a new bug.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":25.0,"staleness":65,"complexity":50,"confidence":60,"support_request":10},"age_days":109,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-05-26T17:00:50+00:00","updated_at":"2026-05-26T17:00:50+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":65,"complexity":50,"support_request":10,"confidence":60,"impact":50,"quick_win":25.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":12527,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"546","title":"'No such file or directory' if application is missing the templates dir","author":"tigarmo","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/issues/546","summary":"craft-application init command crashes with unhelpful FileNotFoundError when the application has no templates directory. Maintainers agreed to improve the error message but no PR was created. Bug still present in current code.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainers explicitly discussed and agreed on a direction: @lengau suggested making the error message more useful and @mr-cal agreed it was 'a good compromise and a quick improvement.' The bug is still present in the current code (profiles property calls parent_template_dir.iterdir() without checking existence). No PR has been created to implement the agreed-upon fix.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":21.25,"staleness":65,"complexity":15,"confidence":75,"support_request":10},"age_days":688,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-10-24T12:19:09+00:00","updated_at":"2025-05-23T17:26:54+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":65,"complexity":15,"support_request":10,"confidence":75,"impact":25,"quick_win":21.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":39297,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"6299","title":"Snapcraft upload+release not capturing review error","author":"farshidtz","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/6299","summary":"snapcraft upload --release reports success despite store review failures due to incorrect status handling in notify_upload. Issue is unlabelled and inactive for 74 days.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue reports a bug where `snapcraft upload --release` falsely reports success when store reviews fail. Code inspection of `snapcraft/store/client.py` suggests the `notify_upload` method incorrectly treats statuses like 'error while processing' as successful if the `errors` field is empty, leading to false positive output. The issue lacks labels and maintainer engagement, requiring triage to verify the API behavior and implement a fix.","scores":{"impact":70,"quick_win":42.0,"staleness":65,"complexity":40,"confidence":80,"support_request":10},"age_days":82,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-06-22T13:56:08+00:00","updated_at":"2026-06-22T14:00:26+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":65,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":80,"impact":70,"quick_win":42.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":6050,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"5842","title":"Linting about execstack in libraries","author":"soumyaDghosh","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/5842","summary":"Feature request to add execstack linting for libraries in snapcraft linters, so store upload blockers are caught before submission. Unlabelled, no maintainer response, 313 days old with zero comments.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"No labels, no comments, no assignee, and no maintainer interaction in 313 days. The linter infrastructure is actively developed (recent commits to snapcraft/linters/), and the elf module already detects execstack via ElfFile.execstack_set (snapcraft/elf/_elf_file.py:203,274), so the underlying capability exists but no linter category uses it. Needs a maintainer to decide whether to scope this as a new linter or an extension of the library linter.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":21.0,"staleness":65,"complexity":40,"confidence":78,"support_request":10},"age_days":325,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-10-22T15:52:40+00:00","updated_at":"2025-10-22T15:52:40+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":65,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":78,"impact":35,"quick_win":21.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":1907,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2225","title":"Allow users to specify custom KNOWN_GOOD_PIP_URL for air-gapped CI/CD pipelines","author":"TresSims","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/2225","summary":"Feature request to add a flag (e.g. --pip-url) so charmcraft builds can fetch pip from a custom/local URL instead of the hardcoded pythonhosted.org link, for air-gapped CI/CD. Maintainer replied with a charmcraft.yaml workaround and said it is unlikely to be implemented soon; the hardcoded URL still exists in code.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer @lengau triaged it (2025-06-07), acknowledged the limitation, and provided a working workaround (a nil-plugin part replacing the pip wheel in /usr/share/python-wheels/), but the hardcoded KNOWN_GOOD_PIP_URL at charmcraft/charm_builder.py:46 is still present at HEAD, so the request remains valid and not obsolete. Inactivity alone (~12.5 months) does not make it irrelevant, so keep_open rather than close_stale.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":21.0,"staleness":65,"complexity":40,"confidence":80,"support_request":20},"age_days":544,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-03-17T13:29:04+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:17:32+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":65,"complexity":40,"support_request":20,"confidence":80,"impact":35,"quick_win":21.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":39167,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2709","title":"On timeout, `remote-build` should return the artifacts that have successfully finished building","author":"sinapah","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/2709","summary":"Feature request for remote-build to return partially built artifacts on timeout instead of failing entirely. Untriaged, 98 days old.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no maintainer response, and has been inactive for 88 days. It is a feature request to modify timeout behavior in remote-build to return partial artifacts rather than failing entirely. @MichaelThamm linked issue #2467 as related, but no maintainer has assessed or prioritized this request yet.","scores":{"impact":60,"quick_win":36.0,"staleness":65,"complexity":40,"confidence":70,"support_request":20},"age_days":106,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-05-29T16:43:24+00:00","updated_at":"2026-06-08T13:32:09+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":65,"complexity":40,"support_request":20,"confidence":70,"impact":60,"quick_win":36.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":12165,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"909","title":"`ProjectService` needs to be runtime configurable to determine whether ESM bases count as supported","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/issues/909","summary":"Enhancement: ProjectService.check_base_is_supported should be runtime-configurable so ESM bases count as supported, enabling Rockcraft's --pro feature to use ESM support as the --ignore=unmaintained cut-off. Triaged, open, no activity since creation ~11 months ago.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is labeled 'Status: Triaged' and 'Type: Enhancement' and was filed by a maintainer (lengau) as part of the WIP --pro feature; Pro support was subsequently finalized in #1047 and pro_services is now plumbed into ProjectService (craft_application/application.py:546), but check_base_is_supported still unconditionally treats ESM bases as EOL, so the requested configurability remains unimplemented. No maintainer has closed or deprioritized it, so it should stay open despite ~11 months of inactivity.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":24.0,"staleness":65,"complexity":40,"confidence":75,"support_request":0},"age_days":361,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2025-09-16T14:15:58+00:00","updated_at":"2025-09-16T14:16:08+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":65,"complexity":40,"support_request":0,"confidence":75,"impact":40,"quick_win":24.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":1636,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2502","title":"Fix missing build metadata in reactive charm artifacts","author":"Copilot","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/pull/2502","summary":"Adds .build.manifest preservation and charmtool_version to manifest.yaml for reactive charm builds. Fixes #872. Inactive 263 days, 0 reviewer approvals, several CI checks failing (snap-tests, Conventional Commits policy).","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"Issue #872 remains open and the fix is not present in main (no matches for charmtool_version or .build.manifest in the codebase), so the PR is still relevant. However, it has sat for ~8.5 months with zero maintainer reviews and has failing CI checks (snap-tests on ubuntu-20/22/24.04, Conventional Commits policy, macos-13 tests) that need a human to triage before it can land.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":19.25,"staleness":65,"complexity":45,"confidence":72},"age_days":283,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-12-03T18:33:56+00:00","updated_at":"2025-12-08T20:48:11+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":true,"staleness":65,"complexity":45,"support_request":null,"confidence":72,"impact":35,"quick_win":19.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":40772,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2776","title":"ci: Cache GitHub workflow tool installs","author":"lengau","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/pull/2776","summary":"Adds caching to npm and Go tool installs in CI workflows to reduce repeated installation costs. 0 reviewers, 2 unresolved review comments, all CI checks passing.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"The PR has 0 reviewers and 2 unresolved review comments after 45 days of inactivity. It proposes straightforward CI caching improvements (npm cache for renovate-check and schema workflows, Go module cache for spread-docs) that are small (+20/-1 lines, 3 files) and all CI checks are passing. A maintainer review is needed to address the unresolved comments and merge.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":29.75,"staleness":65,"complexity":15,"confidence":70},"age_days":64,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-07-11T01:27:44+00:00","updated_at":"2026-07-22T15:51:57+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":65,"complexity":15,"support_request":null,"confidence":70,"impact":35,"quick_win":29.75,"has_related_links":false},{"id":2000,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2132","title":"Prototype integration of testing service","author":"cmatsuoka","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/2132","summary":"Maintainer-created task to integrate craft-application's TestingService into Charmcraft for multi-platform artifact testing. Feature still unimplemented; upstream TestingService with multi-artifact support now exists in craft-application.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Created by maintainer cmatsuoka as a scoped task; charmcraft/services/__init__.py still has no 'testing' entry, confirming the feature is unimplemented. Upstream craft-application now ships TestingService with multi-artifact support (PR #1167), making this more actionable than at creation. No labels or assignee, but the task remains relevant and closing would lose tracking of a known gap.","scores":{"impact":65,"quick_win":16.25,"staleness":65,"complexity":75,"confidence":75,"support_request":0},"age_days":589,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-01-31T13:38:37+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:17:38+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":65,"complexity":75,"support_request":0,"confidence":75,"impact":65,"quick_win":16.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":40972,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"1127","title":"Linter service clears lint results too greedily","author":"bepri","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/issues/1127","summary":"LinterService.run() clears collected issues on each call, losing PRE stage results when POST is also run. Valid bug, untriaged for 53 days.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue describes a valid bug confirmed by the source code: `LinterService.run()` unconditionally calls `self._issues.clear()` and `self._issues_by_linter.clear()` at lines 194-195, discarding results from prior stage runs. However, the issue has no labels, no maintainer comments, and no assignee after 53 days, so it requires triage before any action can be taken.","scores":{"impact":55,"quick_win":41.25,"staleness":65,"complexity":25,"confidence":75,"support_request":15},"age_days":61,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-07-13T21:10:05+00:00","updated_at":"2026-07-13T21:10:05+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":65,"complexity":25,"support_request":15,"confidence":75,"impact":55,"quick_win":41.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":12512,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"561","title":"Prototype spread extension mechanism (test driver)","author":"cmatsuoka","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/issues/561","summary":"Feature request to prototype a spread extension script (test driver) that handles prepare/restore actions and ad-hoc testing backends, decoupling test implementation from craft-application command handling. A spread/.extension script for LXD VM allocate/discard exists in the repo, suggesting partial implementation.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue was created by a maintainer (cmatsuoka) as a prototype task with no labels, no assignee, and only a bot comment syncing to Jira (CRAFT-3689) — no maintainer triage or acknowledgement of completion. The repo contains spread/.extension (a bash script for LXD VM allocate/discard) added in PR #694, which partially addresses the 'ad-hoc testing backends' aspect, but the issue's full scope (prepare/restore actions, decoupling from craft-application) is not clearly resolved. No evidence the work was completed or the issue was intentionally left open.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":20.0,"staleness":65,"complexity":50,"confidence":55,"support_request":0},"age_days":663,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-11-18T12:41:14+00:00","updated_at":"2025-05-23T17:26:52+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":65,"complexity":50,"support_request":0,"confidence":55,"impact":40,"quick_win":20.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":2290,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"1839","title":"Provide a way to cleanly stage chiselled packages","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/1839","summary":"Feature request to support chiselled stage-packages in charmcraft for charms needing system executables/libraries. Blocked by canonical/chisel#156; Jira ticket CRAFT-3666 created. No activity in ~12 months.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer lengau created and triaged this issue, identified the external blocker (chisel#156), and a Jira ticket (CRAFT-3666) was filed. The issue is blocked by an external dependency rather than being irrelevant or abandoned, and the feature remains relevant — snapcraft#4260 already implemented the equivalent for snaps, confirming demand. Inactivity alone is insufficient to close when the blocker's resolution status is unknown.","scores":{"impact":55,"quick_win":19.25,"staleness":65,"complexity":65,"confidence":70,"support_request":5},"age_days":753,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-08-20T18:45:47+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:18:02+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":65,"complexity":65,"support_request":5,"confidence":70,"impact":55,"quick_win":19.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":42029,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"1311","title":"build(snap): try out dev chisel to fix 25.10 builds","author":"tigarmo","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/pull/1311","summary":"Experimental snap build change to use dev chisel for 25.10 builds. Inactive 44 days, 0 reviewers, 1 failing CI check.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"The PR is a small experimental build change (+5/-3 lines) targeting 25.10 snap builds using a dev chisel version. It has been inactive for 44 days with no reviewer engagement (0 comments, 0 reviewers) and has a failing lint CI check. Without evidence it has been superseded or rejected, it warrants maintainer review before closure.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":38.25,"staleness":65,"complexity":15,"confidence":55},"age_days":51,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-07-23T12:05:16+00:00","updated_at":"2026-07-23T12:07:15+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":65,"complexity":15,"support_request":null,"confidence":55,"impact":45,"quick_win":38.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":6285,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"5595","title":"snapcraft and Snap Store validation rules mismatch for `classic` snaps","author":"dmitry-lyfar","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/5595","summary":"Classic snaps with managed unix sockets cannot be published: snapd's snap pack requires the network-bind plug for sockets, but the store rejects classic snaps with plugs. Triaged and blocked on snapd/review-tools (LP bug 2117121); maintainer keeping it open.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer @mr-cal explicitly triaged this (Status: Triaged, Type: Bug labels) and stated on 2025-07-17: 'we'll leave this issue open here until it's resolved between snapd and review-tools.' The fix is external to snapcraft (snapd validate.go vs review-tools policy), tracked in upstream LP bug 2117121, so it should stay open as a tracked blocker even though it has been quiet for over a year.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":65,"complexity":60,"confidence":85,"support_request":10},"age_days":437,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Bug"],"created_at":"2025-07-03T05:08:51+00:00","updated_at":"2025-07-17T12:14:28+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":65,"complexity":60,"support_request":10,"confidence":85,"impact":45,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":39824,"project_name":"craft-providers","source":"github","external_id":"452","title":"macOS CI is failing in PRs","author":"mr-cal","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-providers/issues/452","summary":"macOS CI failing in PRs due to runner timeouts or resource exhaustion; PR macOS CI currently disabled via commented-out jobs in qa.yaml","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue was recently reopened (65 days ago) and is triaged as a bug. Although PR macOS CI is currently disabled (commented out in qa.yaml per PR #982), the issue may still be relevant for weekly macOS tests or future re-enabling of PR CI.","scores":{"impact":60,"quick_win":36.0,"staleness":65,"complexity":40,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":1038,"labels":["Type: Bug","Status: Triaged"],"created_at":"2023-11-10T08:05:51+00:00","updated_at":"2026-07-01T20:34:14+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":65,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":60,"quick_win":36.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":6751,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"5128","title":"KDE Neon 6 broken on arm64","author":"waveform80","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/5128","summary":"kde-neon-6 extension fails on arm64 because the kf6-core22 content snap is missing Qt6 libraries (73MB vs 2GB amd64). Filed 682 days ago, no maintainer response, only 1 user comment. Root cause is in the external KDE content snap, not snapcraft code.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"No maintainer has responded or labelled this issue in ~22 months. The root cause is the kf6-core22 content snap's arm64 build (external to snapcraft), so a maintainer needs to verify whether that snap has since been fixed by the KDE team before deciding to close, document the limitation, or keep open. The extension itself is still actively maintained with recent commits, so the issue is not clearly obsolete.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":27.0,"staleness":65,"complexity":40,"confidence":65,"support_request":25},"age_days":694,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-10-18T13:10:14+00:00","updated_at":"2025-04-14T07:11:28+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":65,"complexity":40,"support_request":25,"confidence":65,"impact":45,"quick_win":27.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":13077,"project_name":"craft-archives","source":"github","external_id":"217","title":"craft-archives does not remove managed repositories that are no longer in the craft.yaml file","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-archives/issues/217","summary":"craft-archives leaves apt sources and keyrings installed when a package-repository is removed from craft.yaml; no removal logic exists in installer.py. Open 285 days, zero comments, no maintainer acknowledgement, though labelled Type: Bug.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"Despite the 'Type: Bug' label, there are zero comments and no maintainer response in 285 days, so it has not been assessed or prioritized. I verified in current code that installer.py/_install_repos only adds sources, keys, and preferences — there is no uninstall/remove path — so the bug is still present and not stale. The reporter explicitly notes the hard part is deciding which packages to revert to previous versions, so it needs a maintainer design decision rather than a quick fix.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":12.0,"staleness":65,"complexity":70,"confidence":75,"support_request":5},"age_days":297,"labels":["Type: Bug"],"created_at":"2025-11-19T17:27:59+00:00","updated_at":"2025-11-19T17:28:11+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":65,"complexity":70,"support_request":5,"confidence":75,"impact":40,"quick_win":12.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":2149,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"1980","title":"Check for major charm library updates","author":"lucabello","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/1980","summary":"Feature request to detect major (LIBAPI) charm library updates via fetch-libs or a new command, enabling CI workflows to flag breaking library upgrades. Maintainer acknowledged as low priority in June 2025; no implementation yet.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer @lengau acknowledged the request in June 2025 as 'fairly low priority' but offered to help with implementation, and the feature (detecting LIBAPI updates) is still absent from fetch-libs in the current code. The issue remains valid, scoped, and actionable, so it should stay open.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":21.0,"staleness":65,"complexity":40,"confidence":80,"support_request":5},"age_days":681,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-10-31T14:50:17+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:17:42+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":65,"complexity":40,"support_request":5,"confidence":80,"impact":35,"quick_win":21.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":11906,"project_name":"debcraft","source":"github","external_id":"93","title":"Automatically use source package's architectures in non-native mode","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/debcraft/issues/93","summary":"Feature request for debcraft non-native mode to read debian/control to determine target architectures instead of defaulting to all standard platforms. Open, unlabelled, no maintainer comments, inactive for 179 days.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is a well-scoped feature request from a maintainer (lengau) but has no labels, no comments, and no assignee, showing no sign of triage. The default platforms logic in debcraft/services/project.py (_app_render_legacy_platforms) still hardcodes all DebianArchitecture values, so the requested behavior is not implemented. Related commit f33e349 (#94) tightened default platforms but did not add control-file-based architecture detection.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":22.5,"staleness":65,"complexity":55,"confidence":70,"support_request":0},"age_days":191,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-03-05T18:19:05+00:00","updated_at":"2026-03-05T18:19:05+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":65,"complexity":55,"support_request":0,"confidence":70,"impact":50,"quick_win":22.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":4802,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"873","title":"Using chiseled JRE images with podman and crun fails when following the documentation","author":"dviererbe","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/873","summary":"Rootless podman with crun fails to run chiseled JRE rocks because rockcraft's hardcoded _daemon_ UID 584792 exceeds the default subuid/subgid range. Workaround (expanding /etc/subuid) confirmed by maintainers; no doc or code fix landed yet.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer @vpa1977 confirmed on 2025-07-03 that the root cause is the hardcoded _daemon_ UID 584792 (verified in rockcraft/usernames.py) falling outside the default podman subuid range, and #911 was closed as a duplicate of this issue. A workaround exists (expanding /etc/subuid) but neither the documentation nor the code has been updated to address it, so the issue remains valid and actionable.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":29.25,"staleness":65,"complexity":35,"confidence":78,"support_request":45},"age_days":502,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-04-28T21:41:28+00:00","updated_at":"2025-07-03T12:23:34+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":65,"complexity":35,"support_request":45,"confidence":78,"impact":45,"quick_win":29.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":1921,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2211","title":"Kubernetes Resource Requests in charmcraft.yaml","author":"alexdlukens","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/2211","summary":"Feature request to add a default-requests field to containers in charmcraft.yaml so charm authors can set Kubernetes CPU/memory resource requests. Maintainers confirmed it requires Juju-side support and asked the reporter to file a tracking request in juju/juju; no implementation exists in charmcraft.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainers actively triaged this on 2025-03-06: @lengau noted Charmcraft cannot do this without Juju providing a way to read hints from metadata.yaml, and @hpidcock asked the reporter to raise a feature request on juju/juju to track it there. The request is valid and cross-project, so it should stay open pending the Juju-side design, though it is blocked on external work.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":15.0,"staleness":65,"complexity":70,"confidence":75,"support_request":10},"age_days":555,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-03-06T13:41:45+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:17:34+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":65,"complexity":70,"support_request":10,"confidence":75,"impact":50,"quick_win":15.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":39828,"project_name":"craft-providers","source":"github","external_id":"544","title":"Managed instance names don't take the base into account","author":"tigarmo","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-providers/issues/544","summary":"Valid bug where managed instance names ignore the project base, causing incorrect reuse when bases change. Maintainers have identified the root cause and agreed on a fix.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is a confirmed bug that has been thoroughly triaged and discussed by maintainers, who identified the root cause and agreed on a specific implementation path (storing `build-base` in `InstanceConfig` for compatibility checks). It should remain open as it awaits development.","scores":{"impact":60,"quick_win":36.0,"staleness":65,"complexity":40,"confidence":85,"support_request":0},"age_days":933,"labels":["Type: Bug"],"created_at":"2024-02-22T12:06:18+00:00","updated_at":"2026-04-22T02:47:51+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":65,"complexity":40,"support_request":0,"confidence":85,"impact":60,"quick_win":36.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":2423,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"1706","title":"Remote build: allow the user to specify a charmcraft channel and default to the charmcraft snap channel","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/1706","summary":"Feature request to let users select the charmcraft snap channel for remote builds (CLI option) and default to the installed snap's tracking channel. Open since 2023, last activity July 2024; no channel option exists in remote-build yet.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The remote-build command in charmcraft/application/commands/remote.py still only exposes --recover, --launchpad-accept-public-upload, and --launchpad-timeout — no channel option — so the request is unimplemented. A maintainer (jugmac00) actively followed it in June 2024, noting the Launchpad team will only announce Charmcraft 3 remote-build support once this works, and it was synced to internal ticket CRAFT-3132, so it remains a tracked, relevant gap rather than stale.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":22.5,"staleness":65,"complexity":55,"confidence":75,"support_request":10},"age_days":821,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-06-13T12:14:02+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:18:08+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":65,"complexity":55,"support_request":10,"confidence":75,"impact":50,"quick_win":22.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":21843,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1242","title":"make plugin: Support `disable-parallel` parameter","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/1242","summary":"Make plugin lacks disable-parallel support. Triaged as low-priority enhancement by maintainer, explicitly awaiting a real-world use case that never arrived in 363 days. Feature still unimplemented; sibling plugin issues (cmake, go, python, etc.) in same state.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is triaged (labels: Status: Triaged, Type: Enhancement) and filed by maintainer lengau, who explicitly scoped it as 'extremely low priority until someone shows us a real-world use case.' The make plugin still hardcodes -j in _get_make_command with no disable_parallel property, so the feature remains unimplemented and the issue is still valid. Sibling issues for other plugins (cmake #1234, go #1237, python #1247) are all in the same open, waiting-for-use-case state, confirming this is a tracked but deprioritized enhancement family rather than a stale or irrelevant report.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":17.0,"staleness":65,"complexity":15,"confidence":82,"support_request":10},"age_days":375,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2025-09-02T15:25:49+00:00","updated_at":"2025-09-02T15:25:57+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":65,"complexity":15,"support_request":10,"confidence":82,"impact":20,"quick_win":17.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":40202,"project_name":"imagecraft","source":"github","external_id":"371","title":"chore: ignore osv-scanner false positives","author":"smethnani","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/imagecraft/pull/371","summary":"PR adds osv-scanner configuration to ignore false positives, currently failing CI with no reviewer engagement after 65 days","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"PR has been inactive for 65 days with zero reviewer engagement and is failing CI checks (OSV-scanner, lint). A maintainer review is needed to assess if the false positive configuration is still relevant and to address the failing CI before deciding whether to merge or close.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":27.0,"staleness":65,"complexity":10,"confidence":60},"age_days":73,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-07-02T05:33:07+00:00","updated_at":"2026-07-02T14:00:20+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":65,"complexity":10,"support_request":null,"confidence":60,"impact":30,"quick_win":27.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":40148,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"2158699","title":"Github build randomly inventing stage-packages","author":"~t-a-k","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2158699","summary":"Snapcraft 9.0.0 randomly downloads undeclared stage-packages in GitHub builds (amd64 only), while same config works locally and for other architectures. No maintainer response in 67 days.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"Issue has no labels, no assignee, and zero maintainer comments after 67 days. The bug report describes non-deterministic dependency resolution behavior that is hard to reproduce but could have significant impact if snapcraft is pulling undeclared packages. Without maintainer triage, it's unclear if this is still reproducible or if it was a transient issue with package mirrors.","scores":{"impact":70,"quick_win":17.5,"staleness":65,"complexity":75,"confidence":55,"support_request":15},"age_days":74,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-06-30T10:54:34.624549+00:00","updated_at":"2026-06-30T11:04:19.910745+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":65,"complexity":75,"support_request":15,"confidence":55,"impact":70,"quick_win":17.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":39836,"project_name":"craft-providers","source":"github","external_id":"931","title":"ci: add support for Python 3.14","author":"lengau","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-providers/pull/931","summary":"Adds Python 3.14 support to CI workflows. 169 days old, no comments or reviewer engagement, mostly passing CI with one failing macOS slow integration test.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"The PR adds Python 3.14 support to CI and is technically sound (mostly passing CI), but has been inactive for 169 days with zero maintainer engagement or comments. It hasn't been superseded or rejected, so it warrants a maintainer review to determine if the feature is still desired or if it should be closed.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":28.0,"staleness":65,"complexity":30,"confidence":60},"age_days":177,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-03-20T01:06:41+00:00","updated_at":"2026-03-20T01:06:58+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":65,"complexity":30,"support_request":null,"confidence":60,"impact":40,"quick_win":28.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":39859,"project_name":"craft-providers","source":"github","external_id":"791","title":"Move troubleshooting info on explanation index","author":"bepri","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-providers/issues/791","summary":"Documentation enhancement to move troubleshooting info from explanation index to a separate document and update NetworkError link in errors.py","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has been open for 388 days with 0 maintainer comments or responses (the author is a maintainer but no other maintainer has engaged). The last activity 7 days ago is ambiguous with no comments, making it unclear if there was any maintainer interaction. It needs assessment to determine if the documentation structure has changed or if this is still relevant.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":24.0,"staleness":65,"complexity":20,"confidence":55,"support_request":10},"age_days":396,"labels":["Type: Documentation","Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2025-08-12T14:08:39+00:00","updated_at":"2026-08-28T20:36:17+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":65,"complexity":20,"support_request":10,"confidence":55,"impact":30,"quick_win":24.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":7723,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"4149","title":"Add a linter for staged libraries included in the base snap","author":"sergiusens","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/4149","summary":"Feature request to add a linter that flags libraries in a snap that are already provided by the base snap, reducing snap size and security surface. Labeled Status: Triaged and Type: Enhancement by maintainer sergiusens. No implementation found in the codebase yet.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is labeled Status: Triaged and Type: Enhancement, indicating it has been assessed by a maintainer. It references PR #3413 as the basis for implementation, and the linters infrastructure has been actively developed (gpu linter #5985, metadata linter #5610, missing library linter #3872). No base-snap linter exists yet in the codebase, so the feature remains unimplemented and relevant.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":20.0,"staleness":65,"complexity":60,"confidence":75,"support_request":0},"age_days":1214,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2023-05-17T16:45:15+00:00","updated_at":"2025-04-24T13:40:28+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":65,"complexity":60,"support_request":0,"confidence":75,"impact":50,"quick_win":20.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":39723,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"6310","title":"fix(store): raise error when upload processing status is 'error'","author":"Tejas-Raj01","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/pull/6310","summary":"Fixes snapcraft upload --release silently reporting success when store review fails by checking status code 'error' in notify_upload. Waiting for maintainer review for 72 days.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"The PR addresses open issue #6299 where `snapcraft upload --release` falsely reports success when the store review fails. The fix adds a simple `status.get('code') == 'error'` check in `notify_upload` with a corresponding test. The bug still exists in the current codebase, but the PR has been waiting for maintainer review for 72 days with two contributor pings and 2 unresolved review comments.","scores":{"impact":55,"quick_win":46.75,"staleness":65,"complexity":15,"confidence":80},"age_days":78,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-06-26T10:43:09+00:00","updated_at":"2026-09-05T19:33:01+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":65,"complexity":15,"support_request":null,"confidence":80,"impact":55,"quick_win":46.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":2217,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"1912","title":"Add option to annotate resources, to enable vulnerability identification","author":"sed-i","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/1912","summary":"Feature request to add an annotation column to charmcraft resource-revisions for workload version tracking and CVE identification. Maintainer acknowledged and filed upstream Charmhub API blocker; no progress since Sep 2024.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer @lengau acknowledged the request on 2024-09-20, stated 'I like it', and identified a concrete external blocker (Charmhub developer API lacks annotation retrieval), filing upstream bug snapstore-server#2081470. Code inspection confirms ListResourceRevisionsCommand still only outputs Revision/Created at/Size/Architectures with no annotation field. The issue is triaged, valid, and blocked on an external dependency rather than being obsolete.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":22.0,"staleness":65,"complexity":45,"confidence":75,"support_request":10},"age_days":723,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-09-20T03:42:54+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:17:47+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":65,"complexity":45,"support_request":10,"confidence":75,"impact":40,"quick_win":22.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":12081,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"993","title":"`request` should be able to retry upon broken connections","author":"zhijie-yang","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/issues/993","summary":"Request service download_chunks crashes with unhandled ChunkedEncodingError when a remote-build artifact download breaks mid-transfer, forcing a full rebuild. No retry logic exists in the code at HEAD; issue is unlabeled with no maintainer activity for ~7 months.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no assignee, and zero comments from maintainers, showing no triage has occurred. It is not stale-closable because the code at HEAD still lacks retry in download_chunks (verified in craft_application/services/request.py), and the repo already has a retry utility (craft_application/util/retry.py) used for Launchpad calls that could be adapted, so the request remains actionable. Complexity is moderate because retrying a streaming download requires restarting/truncating the partial file and reworking the progress-bar loop in download_files_with_progress.","scores":{"impact":55,"quick_win":30.25,"staleness":65,"complexity":45,"confidence":80,"support_request":10},"age_days":230,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-01-25T18:58:08+00:00","updated_at":"2026-01-25T18:58:08+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":65,"complexity":45,"support_request":10,"confidence":80,"impact":55,"quick_win":30.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":3219,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"907","title":"`charmcraft pack` does not handle updating a file's execution permissions without a `charmcraft clean`","author":"ca-scribner","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/907","summary":"charmcraft pack ignores local file permission changes (e.g., chmod +x on src/charm.py) until a full charmcraft clean, causing confusing lint errors. Maintainer reproduced and filed upstream craft-parts#311; still unfixed.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer facundobatista reproduced the bug, gave a touch-based workaround, and filed upstream canonical/craft-parts#311, which is still open. I verified craft-parts' local_source.check_if_outdated still compares only st_mtime (no st_mode check), so the bug is unfixed and this issue is blocked on that upstream fix rather than stale or irrelevant.","scores":{"impact":55,"quick_win":24.75,"staleness":65,"complexity":55,"confidence":85,"support_request":10},"age_days":1426,"labels":[],"created_at":"2022-10-17T18:00:08+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:18:23+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":65,"complexity":55,"support_request":10,"confidence":85,"impact":55,"quick_win":24.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":6947,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"4931","title":"Failed to upload snap created with `assumes: - command-chain`","author":"chanchiwai-ray","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/4931","summary":"Snapcraft duplicates 'command-chain' in assumes when user already lists it, causing snap store upload to fail schema validation. Triaged and confirmed as bug; fix not yet merged. Last activity 461 days ago.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The bug is still present in current code: line 478 of snap_yaml.py does `sorted(project.assumes + list(assumes))` which concatenates the user-provided list with the computed set, producing duplicates when the user already lists 'command-chain'. A maintainer confirmed the bug and provided a workaround, but no fix has been merged. The fix is trivial (use set union instead of list concatenation) and the issue remains reproducible.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":40.5,"staleness":65,"complexity":10,"confidence":80,"support_request":5},"age_days":782,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Bug"],"created_at":"2024-07-22T12:22:08+00:00","updated_at":"2025-05-27T21:27:46+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":65,"complexity":10,"support_request":5,"confidence":80,"impact":45,"quick_win":40.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":5552,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"122","title":"`rockcraft pack` uses all available memory","author":"gruyaume","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/122","summary":"Rockcraft 0.0.1.dev1 (Oct 2022) report that `rockcraft pack` exhausts all system memory and crashes. Maintainer could not reproduce the memory issue; 2026 triage requested updated repro info, but the reporter has not responded in over 6 months.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The 2026-02-26 triage comment requested updated repro details (exact repo ref, rockcraft version, LXD profile) and the reporter has not responded for over 6 months (last activity 186 days ago). The original report targets Rockcraft 0.0.1.dev1 from Oct 2022, which is long superseded, and cmatsuoka in Jan 2023 could not reproduce the memory exhaustion, instead hitting a different error ('/root/stage/bin/protoc': No such file or directory) with a non-existent repro branch ('lte2').","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":12.25,"staleness":65,"complexity":65,"confidence":70,"support_request":20},"age_days":1431,"labels":[],"created_at":"2022-10-13T00:47:15+00:00","updated_at":"2026-02-26T07:29:56+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":65,"complexity":65,"support_request":20,"confidence":70,"impact":35,"quick_win":12.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":6962,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"4916","title":"`--enable-manifest` and `--manifest-image-information` deprecation warnings display when options haven't been used","author":"jhenstridge","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/4916","summary":"Snapcraft emits spurious deprecation warnings for --enable-manifest and --manifest-image-information when users set the documented SNAPCRAFT_BUILD_INFO/SNAPCRAFT_IMAGE_INFO env vars instead of the flags. Maintainer confirmed repro and root cause (argparse defaults consume env vars); bug still present in code.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer mr-cal confirmed the repro and identified the root cause ('argparse defaults --enable-manifest to SNAPCRAFT_BUILD_INFO... Snapcraft needs to emit deprecation warnings before consuming the envvars'), so the issue is triaged and valid. The bug is still present in the current code (snapcraft/parts/lifecycle.py:357-361 and 456-464 still warn based on parsed_args values that are populated from env vars), so it remains relevant. It is a minor cosmetic annoyance rather than a functional break, keeping impact low.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":14.0,"staleness":65,"complexity":30,"confidence":85,"support_request":0},"age_days":790,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-07-15T09:05:49+00:00","updated_at":"2025-03-13T18:37:13+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":65,"complexity":30,"support_request":0,"confidence":85,"impact":20,"quick_win":14.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":2598,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"1530","title":"Changing charmcraft.yaml doesn't update the resulting charm's metadata.yaml","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/1530","summary":"Bug: editing charmcraft.yaml then re-running `charmcraft pack` does not update the resulting charm's metadata.yaml. Filed by a maintainer (lengau); last comment (2024-09-09) says it's unclear if still reproducible. Related open craft-application#821 describes the same 'Already packed' skip behavior.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"A maintainer (lengau) acknowledged the issue on 2024-09-09 ('I'm unsure whether this is still an issue - need to check'), so it is triaged and not stale-dead. The related open craft-application#821 ('5.5.0 changes pack semantics if the project file has different metadata' — pack skips rebuilding when charmcraft.yaml metadata changes, reporting 'Already packed') indicates the underlying bug is still present and unresolved, so it should remain open pending verification.","scores":{"impact":55,"quick_win":24.75,"staleness":65,"complexity":55,"confidence":70,"support_request":5},"age_days":936,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-02-20T04:47:01+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:18:16+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":65,"complexity":55,"support_request":5,"confidence":70,"impact":55,"quick_win":24.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":2131,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"1998","title":"Add published date column to `charmcraft statsus` output","author":"taurus-forever","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/1998","summary":"Feature request to add a Published date column to charmcraft status output, showing when each revision was released. Maintainer acknowledged it as straightforward (add the 'when' field from store API), Jira ticket CRAFT-3699 created, but no implementation progress in ~12 months.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer @lengau acknowledged on 2024-11-18 that it is 'pretty straightforward' and identified the exact fix (add the 'when' field from the store response). A Jira ticket (CRAFT-3699) was created, confirming triage. Code inspection confirms the Release dataclass in charmcraft/store/models.py still lacks a 'when' field and list_releases in charmcraft/store/store.py does not parse it, so the feature remains unimplemented and the issue is still relevant despite ~12 months of inactivity.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":24.0,"staleness":65,"complexity":20,"confidence":80,"support_request":10},"age_days":663,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-11-18T12:05:11+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:17:49+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":65,"complexity":20,"support_request":10,"confidence":80,"impact":30,"quick_win":24.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":39843,"project_name":"craft-providers","source":"github","external_id":"871","title":"Fix daemon stopping error during LXD container initialization","author":"copilot-swe-agent","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-providers/pull/871","summary":"Adds retry logic with exponential backoff to handle transient snapd socket activation errors during LXD container initialization. Has failing CI checks and unresolved review comments.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"The PR addresses an open issue (#870) with a reasonable retry-based fix, but CI checks show multiple failing tests (ubuntu-24.04-arm, macos-13, minimum dependencies) and there are 4 unresolved review comments. Recent activity (6 days ago) suggests it's still active, but the CI failures and pending review require maintainer assessment before merge.","scores":{"impact":55,"quick_win":30.25,"staleness":65,"complexity":45,"confidence":65},"age_days":278,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-12-08T21:47:27+00:00","updated_at":"2026-08-29T12:30:53+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":65,"complexity":45,"support_request":null,"confidence":65,"impact":55,"quick_win":30.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":41191,"project_name":"craft-cli","source":"github","external_id":"462","title":"Fix stray ^M characters in subprocess output when redirected to file","author":"copilot-swe-agent","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-cli/pull/462","summary":"Normalizes carriage returns in subprocess output when redirected to files, preventing stray ^M characters. Adds tests for bare \\r and Windows \\r\\n line endings. Awaiting maintainer review with minor CI failures on lint and conventional commit title.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"This is a legitimate bug fix for stray ^M characters in redirected subprocess output, but it has been open 51 days with zero human comments and zero reviewers. The PR has 2 unresolved review comments (unspecified) and fails CI on fixable lint/conventional-commit-title checks. A maintainer review is needed to assess the approach and address the unresolved comments.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":38.25,"staleness":65,"complexity":15,"confidence":65},"age_days":59,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-07-15T17:59:51+00:00","updated_at":"2026-08-30T01:47:37+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":65,"complexity":15,"support_request":null,"confidence":65,"impact":45,"quick_win":38.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":6170,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"5716","title":"Use hkps by default","author":"dilyn-corner","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/5716","summary":"Suggests hkps:// for GPG keyservers to fix fetch failures in some networks. Triaged as docs task; maintainer confirmed port-80 fallback exists (craft-archives #189), deferred default change to Snapcraft 9. No hkps docs or code added since.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is triaged (labels: Status: Triaged, Type: Documentation) and maintainer @mr-cal explicitly acknowledged it, stating 'Adding that to the documentation (perhaps a how-to) seems like a great short-term improvement' and confirming the port-80 fallback from craft-archives PR #189 covers core22/core24. A Jira ticket (SNAPCRAFT-1213) was created. Although inactive for ~12 months, the problem remains valid — no hkps references exist in either snapcraft or craft-archives code or docs — and the issue is clearly scoped as a documentation how-to, so it should stay open until addressed.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":26.25,"staleness":65,"complexity":25,"confidence":78,"support_request":10},"age_days":388,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Documentation"],"created_at":"2025-08-20T21:15:36+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-21T15:38:29+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":65,"complexity":25,"support_request":10,"confidence":78,"impact":35,"quick_win":26.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":5017,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"658","title":"Help includes expand-extensions entry with reference to snapcraft.yaml","author":"hartmutobendorf","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/658","summary":"rockcraft help --all shows expand-extensions referencing snapcraft.yaml instead of rockcraft.yaml. Bug still present in code; two approved but unmerged PRs (#885, #1103) fix the help text. Labeled good first issue, no maintainer activity since 2024.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The bug is verified still present at rockcraft/commands/extensions.py:88 (help_msg = \"Expand extensions in snapcraft.yaml\") and the class docstring, so it is not stale-irrelevant. It carries the 'good first issue' label (triaged) and two approved, CI-green PRs (#885, #1103) already fix it but are unmerged, so the issue should stay open until one lands. Inactivity is ~12.5 months (only a Jira-sync bot comment), but the fix is trivial and ready.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":14.25,"staleness":65,"complexity":5,"confidence":85,"support_request":0},"age_days":772,"labels":["good first issue"],"created_at":"2024-08-01T10:41:01+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:12:49+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":65,"complexity":5,"support_request":0,"confidence":85,"impact":15,"quick_win":14.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":39818,"project_name":"craft-providers","source":"github","external_id":"259","title":"Cannot launch lxd instance with high uids","author":"mr-cal","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-providers/issues/259","summary":"Bug preventing LXD instance launch for users with UID > 65,535. Acknowledged by maintainer, no fix yet, workaround available.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"This is a valid bug affecting enterprise deployments with high UIDs, acknowledged by maintainer mr-cal who confirmed no progress has been made and provided a workaround. The issue remains unfixed and should stay open for future resolution.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":20.25,"staleness":65,"complexity":55,"confidence":75,"support_request":15},"age_days":1235,"labels":["Type: Bug"],"created_at":"2023-04-26T16:09:28+00:00","updated_at":"2026-04-22T02:48:03+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":65,"complexity":55,"support_request":15,"confidence":75,"impact":45,"quick_win":20.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":39804,"project_name":"craft-providers","source":"github","external_id":"765","title":"Set up weekly tests for tests that don't need to run on each PR","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-providers/issues/765","summary":"Enhancement request to add weekly Linux integration tests. Weekly test workflow exists but only covers macOS; Linux tests and full base coverage remain incomplete.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is a valid enhancement request that remains relevant: the weekly test workflow exists but only covers macOS (integration-macos and integration-slow-macos jobs), while the issue specifically requests Linux integration tests. The code in tests/integration/test_relaunch.py still references this issue with a comment saying 'We should enable all of these for weekly tests' (line 43), confirming the work is incomplete.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"staleness":65,"complexity":40,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":439,"labels":["Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2025-06-30T19:33:37+00:00","updated_at":"2026-04-22T02:48:33+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":65,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":15357,"project_name":"craft-store","source":"github","external_id":"97","title":"Confusing error message on expired macaroon","author":"sergiusens","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-store/issues/97","summary":"craft-store shows a confusing 'macaroon-permission-required' error when store credentials expire instead of telling users to re-login. Triaged by a maintainer with a Jira ticket (CRAFT-3385), but no code work; last activity ~11 months ago.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue carries 'Status: Triaged' and 'Type: Bug' labels, the maintainer (sergiusens) proposed a concrete approach (client-side expiration check via the exported creds), and an internal Jira ticket CRAFT-3385 was created in Sept 2024 — so it is acknowledged and scoped, not stale-dead. No evidence the fix landed, and the confusing error on expired credentials is still a real UX problem, so it should stay open despite ~11 months of inactivity.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":21.0,"staleness":65,"complexity":40,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":1123,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Bug"],"created_at":"2023-08-16T11:44:48+00:00","updated_at":"2025-09-17T21:47:29+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":65,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":35,"quick_win":21.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":15938,"project_name":"starbase","source":"github","external_id":"307","title":"Change indentation format for RST (and possibly Markdown?) files","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/starbase/issues/307","summary":"Charmcraft docs formatting: set RST indent_size to 2 (per PR #2010 review) and decide markdown indent_size and max_line_length. Open since Dec 2024; maintainer noted in Jan 2025 it could be an early task for a new contributor, but no PR or further activity since.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"A maintainer explicitly acknowledged the issue on 2025-01-06 ('Executing this could be a good early task for JJ'), so it is triaged and valid, not stale-dead. It is a small, well-scoped config change (ruff indent_size for RST, plus open questions on markdown and max_line_length), but no PR has landed and the last activity is ~16 months old, so it should stay open pending a contributor rather than be closed.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":17.0,"staleness":65,"complexity":15,"confidence":60,"support_request":0},"age_days":631,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-12-20T17:53:26+00:00","updated_at":"2025-04-29T16:53:16+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":65,"complexity":15,"support_request":0,"confidence":60,"impact":20,"quick_win":17.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":6770,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"5109","title":"extensions: simplifies the platform plug","author":"soumyaDghosh","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/pull/5109","summary":"Simplifies desktop command chain and makes platform plug configurable instead of hardcoded gnome-platform path. Approved by 2 reviewers, but author deferred rework pending #5092 which has now merged. No activity in 360 days.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"Author explicitly stated 'I think better to wait, and once her PR is ready, I can rework on things' and maintainer agreed to wait on #5092. That blocker has now merged, but the author has not returned in 360 days to rework the PR. A maintainer should ping the author to update the branch or confirm it still applies against current main.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":26.25,"staleness":65,"complexity":25,"confidence":72},"age_days":702,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-10-10T18:02:17+00:00","updated_at":"2025-09-05T21:13:56+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":65,"complexity":25,"support_request":null,"confidence":72,"impact":35,"quick_win":26.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":42318,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"2161839","title":"[Github] Build logs not available","author":"~t-a-k","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2161839","summary":"Build logs not displaying on snapcraft.io, with infinite loading spinner reported by external contributor. No maintainer response or labels after 38 days of inactivity.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no assignee, and zero maintainer comments after 38 days of inactivity. The reporter describes a clear bug (infinite loading of build logs on snapcraft.io) but no maintainer has acknowledged or categorized it yet. A concrete reproducer or more details would help triage.","scores":{"impact":55,"quick_win":35.75,"staleness":65,"complexity":35,"confidence":60,"support_request":15},"age_days":48,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-07-26T14:18:13.319846+00:00","updated_at":"2026-07-29T09:42:04.136833+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":65,"complexity":35,"support_request":15,"confidence":60,"impact":55,"quick_win":35.75,"has_related_links":false},{"id":40458,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"1119","title":"Prepare instance environment in LP builds","author":"cmatsuoka","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/issues/1119","summary":"Issue about configuring proxy settings for Launchpad build instances. Triaged but inactive for 61 days with no implementation started.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has been triaged (Status: Triaged label) and represents a legitimate feature requirement for LP builds. No evidence exists that it has been fixed or is no longer relevant. The 61-day inactivity is typical for open-source projects where triaged issues await resource allocation.","scores":{"impact":60,"quick_win":33.0,"staleness":65,"complexity":45,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":68,"labels":["Status: Triaged"],"created_at":"2026-07-06T14:43:35+00:00","updated_at":"2026-07-06T14:44:02+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":65,"complexity":45,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":60,"quick_win":33.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":40222,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"6318","title":"snapcraft's lxc command string is not working without LANG=C on Ubuntu Touch","author":"fredldotme","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/6318","summary":"LXC exec command times out on Ubuntu Touch due to locale/encoding issues with env command string; untriaged, no maintainer response after 65 days.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no maintainer response, and 0 comments after 65 days. It reports a subprocess.TimeoutExpired when running LXC commands on Ubuntu Touch, with the user noting LANG=C is required for correct env string interpretation. A maintainer needs to assess whether this is a valid bug in locale handling or a configuration issue for a non-standard environment.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":12.0,"staleness":65,"complexity":40,"confidence":40,"support_request":60},"age_days":72,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-07-02T14:11:29+00:00","updated_at":"2026-07-02T14:14:24+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":65,"complexity":40,"support_request":60,"confidence":40,"impact":20,"quick_win":12.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":5303,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"372","title":"List of supported SPDX licenses is outdated ","author":"cjdcordeiro","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/372","summary":"Rockcraft's SPDX license validation uses outdated spdx_lookup 0.3.3 (322 licenses vs 598 in SPDX), rejecting valid IDs like PSF-2.0 and BUSL-1.1. Maintainers discussed swapping to a fuller list; Jira CRAFT-2787 created. Code still uses spdx_lookup as of HEAD.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Verified in rockcraft/models/project.py that spdx_lookup.by_id() is still the validation path and uv.lock pins spdx-lookup 0.3.3 (2020), so the reported BUSL-1.1/PSF-2.0 rejections remain reproducible. The issue was triaged with maintainer replies and an internal Jira ticket (CRAFT-2787), and the underlying problem is still present in the code, so it should stay open despite ~12.5 months of inactivity.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":26.0,"staleness":65,"complexity":35,"confidence":78,"support_request":10},"age_days":1069,"labels":[],"created_at":"2023-10-09T13:53:28+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:12:43+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":65,"complexity":35,"support_request":10,"confidence":78,"impact":40,"quick_win":26.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":39848,"project_name":"craft-providers","source":"github","external_id":"830","title":"Provide an asynchronous API for starting and handling instances","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-providers/issues/830","summary":"Enhancement to add asynchronous API for starting and handling instances in craft-providers to enable parallel builds. Triaged but inactive for 352 days.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is triaged and represents a valid enhancement request for async instance handling to enable parallel builds. It remains relevant as the feature hasn't been implemented elsewhere and the use case (parallel builds for multi-base charms) is still valid per the referenced charmcraft#861.","scores":{"impact":75,"quick_win":18.75,"staleness":65,"complexity":75,"confidence":70,"support_request":0},"age_days":360,"labels":["Type: Enhancement","Status: Triaged"],"created_at":"2025-09-17T20:15:13+00:00","updated_at":"2025-09-17T20:15:51+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":65,"complexity":75,"support_request":0,"confidence":70,"impact":75,"quick_win":18.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":21846,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1239","title":"gradle plugin: Support `disable-parallel` parameter","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/1239","summary":"Gradle plugin lacks disable-parallel part property support. Labeled Needs information; maintainer proposed a 3-state (None/False/True) design but is waiting for a real-world use case. No implementation in code after 363 days.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is triaged (labeled Type: Enhancement, Status: Needs information) and the maintainer provided a concrete design proposal (None/False/True states) in a comment. The feature still does not exist in gradle_plugin.py (confirmed via code inspection — no disable_parallel field). It is part of a family of 7+ sibling issues for other plugins, so closing it would fragment the tracking. However, the maintainer explicitly called it 'extremely low priority until someone shows us a real-world use case,' and no use case has been provided in 363 days, keeping impact low.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":9.75,"staleness":65,"complexity":35,"confidence":75,"support_request":10},"age_days":375,"labels":["Type: Enhancement","Status: Needs information"],"created_at":"2025-09-02T15:24:42+00:00","updated_at":"2025-09-02T15:46:23+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":65,"complexity":35,"support_request":10,"confidence":75,"impact":15,"quick_win":9.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":5122,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"553","title":"Add `list-plugins` command","author":"sed-i","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/553","summary":"Feature request to add a `rockcraft list-plugins` CLI command (like snapcraft) so users can see supported plugins without relying on docs. Triaged by a maintainer who noted a full solution needs declarative per-base plugin selection; no command implemented yet.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer @lengau (2024-09-06) acknowledged the request and explained a 'full' solution requires a declarative way to select plugins per base plus doc tests, making it a valid, triaged feature request blocked on a design decision. No `list-plugins` command exists in rockcraft/commands or the codebase, and the last activity (263 days ago) is within a year, so it should stay open rather than be closed as stale.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":10.5,"staleness":63,"complexity":70,"confidence":78,"support_request":10},"age_days":877,"labels":["Type: Documentation"],"created_at":"2024-04-18T21:31:08+00:00","updated_at":"2025-12-11T14:50:00+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":63,"complexity":70,"support_request":10,"confidence":78,"impact":35,"quick_win":10.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":4195,"project_name":"imagecraft","source":"github","external_id":"272","title":"chore: change mount calls to use pathlib","author":"EdmilsonRodrigues","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/imagecraft/pull/272","summary":"Chore PR adapting imagecraft's craft-parts mount/umount calls to the new pathlib-based API (craft-parts#1424). +18/-18 across 2 files. Pending, 0 reviewers, 0 comments, no CI; dormant 166 days.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"Main branch still calls the old craft_parts os_utils.mount/umount API (imagecraft/pack/chroot.py:86,95,103), so the adaptation is not yet applied and the change remains potentially relevant. However, with 0 comments, 0 reviewers, no CI, and 166 days of inactivity, it needs a maintainer to confirm whether the craft-parts#1424 API change is in the pinned dependency before it can be judged mergeable or stale.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":20.0,"staleness":62,"complexity":20,"confidence":55},"age_days":223,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-02-01T20:46:10+00:00","updated_at":"2026-03-18T15:29:35+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":62,"complexity":20,"support_request":null,"confidence":55,"impact":25,"quick_win":20.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29636,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1859046","title":"Allow Custom Build Certificate Authority And Proxy Credentials","author":"~zicklag","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1859046","summary":"Feature request to pass HTTP proxy env vars and custom CA certificates to LXD build environments. Proxy vars (http_proxy, https_proxy, no_proxy) are now forwarded via PR #4973; CA portion appears unaddressed. Issue is 2426 days old with zero maintainer interaction.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The proxy-variables portion of this request is now addressed by PR #4973 (forwarding http_proxy/https_proxy/no_proxy into core24 build environments, closing #4943), but the custom certificate-authority portion appears unaddressed. The issue has had zero maintainer comments in 2426 days and needs re-evaluation to determine whether the remaining CA requirement is still in scope or should be split into a separate issue.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":19.25,"staleness":62,"complexity":45,"confidence":62,"support_request":35},"age_days":2438,"labels":["certificate-authority","http-proxy"],"created_at":"2020-01-09T17:27:16.129208+00:00","updated_at":"2023-11-12T22:42:46.208732+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":62,"complexity":45,"support_request":35,"confidence":62,"impact":35,"quick_win":19.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":7043,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"4835","title":"File filtering handled incorrectly","author":"dilyn-corner","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/4835","summary":"Snapcraft stage filter excludes a file, but priming its parent directory fails with CopyFileNotFound because prime lists files from the install dir. Triaged bug, blocked on craft-parts#766 design work; last maintainer update ~14 months ago.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Labeled 'Status: Triaged, Type: Bug' and reproduced directly with craft-parts by @mr-cal, who confirmed the root cause and stated 'Making this fix has some concerning side effects with overlays in craft-parts. We have some upstream documentation and design work to do before this can be completed (craft-parts#766)'. It is a valid, acknowledged bug blocked on upstream design work, not stale or irrelevant, so it should stay open.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":12.6,"staleness":62,"complexity":72,"confidence":82,"support_request":5},"age_days":831,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Bug"],"created_at":"2024-06-03T14:43:04+00:00","updated_at":"2025-06-23T13:52:50+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":62,"complexity":72,"support_request":5,"confidence":82,"impact":45,"quick_win":12.6,"has_related_links":true},{"id":13104,"project_name":"craft-archives","source":"github","external_id":"190","title":"No explanation for using local GPG keys","author":"dilyn-corner","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-archives/issues/190","summary":"Documentation gap: repo_properties.rst lacks explanation of local GPG key usage (snap/keys/<last8>.asc) for APT repos. Triaged, maintainer acknowledged, synced to Jira CRAFT-4692. Docstrings in package_repository.py now partially cover it, but RST docs still missing the explanation. Inactive ~12.7 months.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is properly triaged (Status: Triaged label), acknowledged by maintainer @lengau who scoped it into two parts, and synced to Jira CRAFT-4692. The documentation gap in docs/reference/repo_properties.rst still exists — it documents key-id and key-server but not the local key asset mechanism. While PR #162 added docstrings to package_repository.py explaining the snap/keys/<short-thumbprint>.asc lookup, the standalone RST reference page the issue specifically calls out remains unchanged. Inactivity exceeds a year but the issue is not irrelevant.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":28.0,"staleness":62,"complexity":20,"confidence":72,"support_request":10},"age_days":402,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Documentation","Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2025-08-06T15:38:04+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-14T01:30:14+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":62,"complexity":20,"support_request":10,"confidence":72,"impact":35,"quick_win":28.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":5990,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"5918","title":"Add a how-to for controlling package versions","author":"bepri","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/5918","summary":"Doc request to add how-to for controlling package versions in snaps (PPAs, deadsnakes, compiling own libs). Target file package-provisioning.rst does not exist. Maintainer commented with user dialogue as source material ~9 months ago; no PR or further activity since.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is labelled Type: Documentation, filed by maintainer bepri, and acknowledged by medubelko with captured user dialogue as source material. The target file docs/how-to/package-provisioning.rst does not exist in the repo, and while manage-dependencies.rst and reference/package-repositories.rst partially cover the topic, neither provides the dedicated how-to for controlling versions (PPAs, deadsnakes, compiling own dev libraries) that this issue requests. The documentation gap is still present, so the issue remains relevant despite ~9 months of inactivity.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":24.5,"staleness":62,"complexity":30,"confidence":72,"support_request":20},"age_days":276,"labels":["Type: Documentation"],"created_at":"2025-12-10T14:31:56+00:00","updated_at":"2025-12-10T18:55:23+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":62,"complexity":30,"support_request":20,"confidence":72,"impact":35,"quick_win":24.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":12281,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"793","title":"Opt-in configuration to always use git+ssh for remote builds","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/issues/793","summary":"Enhancement to add an opt-in config for always using git+ssh in remote builds instead of HTTPS for public repos. Triaged by maintainer, no implementation yet; code still uses HTTPS for public repos.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is labeled 'Status: Triaged' and 'Type: Enhancement', filed by maintainer lengau. Code inspection confirms the described behavior is still present: remotebuild.py line 366 uses git_ssh_url only when repository.private is True, and no use_ssh config option exists in _config.py. The feature remains unimplemented and the problem is still applicable, so the issue should stay open despite 431 days of inactivity.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":19.25,"staleness":62,"complexity":45,"confidence":80,"support_request":5},"age_days":443,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2025-06-27T01:32:26+00:00","updated_at":"2025-06-27T01:32:36+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":62,"complexity":45,"support_request":5,"confidence":80,"impact":35,"quick_win":19.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":5046,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"629","title":"Create a Plugins explanation page","author":"hd9","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/629","summary":"Request for a dedicated plugins explanation page in Rockcraft docs; the reference page exists but no high-level introduction does. Maintainers agreed on direction in 2024-07, but no such page has been added since and the gap persists.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainers engaged and scoped the ask: tigarmo asked for elaboration and cjdcordeiro proposed a high-level introduction modeled on snapcraft.io/docs/snapcraft-plugins. I verified docs/explanation/index.rst still lists no plugins explanation page and no commit has added one, so the gap is real and the issue is still applicable — inactivity alone (263 days) does not justify closing.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":24.5,"staleness":62,"complexity":30,"confidence":80,"support_request":10},"age_days":800,"labels":["Type: Documentation"],"created_at":"2024-07-05T01:28:34+00:00","updated_at":"2025-12-11T15:13:05+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":62,"complexity":30,"support_request":10,"confidence":80,"impact":35,"quick_win":24.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":12778,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"295","title":"Store the user's Launchpad credentials in a keyring when available","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/issues/295","summary":"Feature request to store Launchpad credentials in the OS keyring (via craft-store/launchpadlib) with a file fallback, instead of always writing them to a file. Open, unlabelled, no maintainer response beyond the Jira-sync bot; still unimplemented in the launchpad client.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no assignee, and the only comment is the autogenerated Jira-sync bot message (CRAFT-2665) — no maintainer has assessed, categorised, or prioritised it. The underlying code still uses launchpadlib's file-based credentials (credentials_file in craft_application/launchpad/launchpad.py), so it is not stale-irrelevant, just untriaged.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":62,"complexity":55,"confidence":75,"support_request":10},"age_days":892,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-04-03T21:25:19+00:00","updated_at":"2025-05-23T17:26:59+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":62,"complexity":55,"support_request":10,"confidence":75,"impact":40,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":1898,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2234","title":"An unnecessary warning is raised when running charmcraft pack","author":"jdkandersson","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/2234","summary":"charmcraft pack emits a confusing 'Cannot get a keyring' warning even though packing needs no store auth; warning still present in current code, no maintainer response or labels.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"No labels, no maintainer comments, and no assignee, so this has not been triaged. The warning is still emitted in charmcraft/services/store.py setup() (line 109) whenever NoKeyringError occurs, including during pack, so the reported behavior is still reproducible and not fixed. It is a real (if minor) UX bug rather than a support question.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":19.5,"staleness":62,"complexity":35,"confidence":60,"support_request":15},"age_days":536,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-03-25T12:51:02+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:17:53+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":62,"complexity":35,"support_request":15,"confidence":60,"impact":30,"quick_win":19.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":21868,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1217","title":"cargo-use: support Rust workspaces better","author":"Saviq","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/1217","summary":"Feature request to improve the cargo-use plugin for Rust workspaces (multi-crate repos), where crates inheriting metadata from the workspace root fail to parse. No labels or maintainer response; the plugin still lacks workspace support at HEAD.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, zero comments, and no maintainer acknowledgement, so it has never been triaged. The reported gap is still real at HEAD: cargo_use_plugin.py still copies the entire source tree and raises 'Package section is missing in Cargo.toml file' for virtual workspaces, with no per-crate cargo package support. It should be kept open and triaged rather than closed, since the limitation persists.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":62,"complexity":55,"confidence":80,"support_request":15},"age_days":383,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-08-26T06:59:10+00:00","updated_at":"2025-12-16T08:42:46+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":62,"complexity":55,"support_request":15,"confidence":80,"impact":40,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":22272,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"813","title":"java plugin should not link java under /bin","author":"vpa1977","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/813","summary":"Java plugin hardcodes a /bin/java symlink, causing stage collisions in rockcraft builds. Maintainer acknowledged (Aug 2024) that an override option is needed but details are unresolved; no fix implemented, issue still open.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer lengau explicitly acknowledged the issue on 2024-08-30, saying it 'makes a lot of sense' paired with the jlink plugin and 'we'll just need to figure out details', indicating triaged buy-in. The current code still hardcodes ${CRAFT_PART_INSTALL}/bin/java in _get_java_link_commands, so the problem persists. Inactivity alone (~18 months) is not sufficient to close since the maintainer endorsed the direction.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":22.5,"staleness":62,"complexity":55,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":758,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-08-15T23:50:09+00:00","updated_at":"2025-03-11T14:28:25+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":62,"complexity":55,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":50,"quick_win":22.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":22531,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"553","title":"Organize does not raise error if source file does not exist","author":"amandahla","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/553","summary":"craft-parts organize silently succeeds when a non-glob source file does not exist, so a renamed/missing file in a rockcraft.yaml organize mapping is not caught at build time. Maintainer confirmed root cause (empty glob iterator) in 2023; no fix landed.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer tigarmo diagnosed the root cause on 2023-09-15 (empty glob iterator in organize.py means a missing non-glob source is silently skipped), and the current code still uses base.glob() with no error when src_count == 0, so the bug is unfixed. It is a real correctness bug (silent missing files in built rocks) with a clear, small fix, but it has no labels/assignee and no recent activity, so it should stay open pending triage rather than be closed.","scores":{"impact":55,"quick_win":33.0,"staleness":62,"complexity":40,"confidence":80,"support_request":5},"age_days":1093,"labels":[],"created_at":"2023-09-15T13:58:30+00:00","updated_at":"2025-03-11T14:28:42+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":62,"complexity":40,"support_request":5,"confidence":80,"impact":55,"quick_win":33.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":11943,"project_name":"debcraft","source":"github","external_id":"56","title":"test: unit tests for get_package and get_partitions methods","author":"Copilot","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/debcraft/pull/56","summary":"Adds unit tests for Project.get_package() and PackagesProject.get_partitions() as follow-up to merged #54. Pending rebase onto main requested by a maintainer; the Copilot bot can't force-push, and no activity for about 9 months.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer lengau asked on 2025-12-06 to rebase the branch on main, and the Copilot bot replied it lacks force-push access and asked a human to rebase; nothing has happened since (last activity 268 days ago). The tests remain relevant because #54, which added get_package/get_partitions, is merged, so a maintainer should rebase and push (or close and have the bot open a fresh branch) rather than let it rot. The large +578/-108 diff across 21 files for a test-only PR suggests the branch predates #54 and will shrink substantially after rebasing.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":16.25,"staleness":62,"complexity":35,"confidence":65},"age_days":289,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-11-27T22:56:42+00:00","updated_at":"2025-12-06T16:08:27+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":true,"staleness":62,"complexity":35,"support_request":null,"confidence":65,"impact":25,"quick_win":16.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":6231,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"5652","title":"Snaps can't be debugged via gdb even in `Debug` builds.","author":"ofry","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/5652","summary":"GDB fails to load symbols from large snap Debug binaries via remote gdbserver. Investigation showed it's a GDB limitation with large debug binaries over remote connections, not a snapcraft/snapd bug. Stalled ~12 months awaiting a minimal non-snap repro to file with GDB.","suggested_action":"close_not_a_bug","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer valentindavid explicitly demonstrated the issue reproduces without snapd (plain gdbserver + large debug binary) and stated 'Not snapd related'. The root cause is GDB's inability to download large debug binaries from a remote target, not a snapcraft or snapd defect. The issue has been stalled for ~12 months (last activity 372 days ago) with the reporter never providing the requested minimal non-snap reproduction to file upstream with GDB.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":10.5,"staleness":62,"complexity":65,"confidence":72,"support_request":45},"age_days":411,"labels":["Type: Research","Status: Needs information"],"created_at":"2025-07-28T16:30:46+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-24T08:14:51+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":62,"complexity":65,"support_request":45,"confidence":72,"impact":30,"quick_win":10.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":12388,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"685","title":"overlayfs tests break on plucky","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/issues/685","summary":"Overlayfs integration test test_package_repositories_in_overlay fails on Ubuntu Plucky due to AppArmor denying fusermount3 mount operations. No maintainer response, no labels, no fix committed in ~15 months.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"No labels, no assignee, and the only comment is an automated Jira-sync bot message. The test still exists at tests/integration/services/test_lifecycle.py:151 and no AppArmor-related fix has been committed to craft-application or craft-parts, so the issue remains valid but has never been triaged by a maintainer.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":16.5,"staleness":62,"complexity":45,"confidence":75,"support_request":0},"age_days":543,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-03-18T20:41:49+00:00","updated_at":"2025-05-23T17:26:46+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":62,"complexity":45,"support_request":0,"confidence":75,"impact":30,"quick_win":16.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":5677,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"6249","title":"fix(linter): skip foreign-arch ELF files in library linter","author":"lengau","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/pull/6249","summary":"Adds elf_machine to _ArchConfig and get_host_elf_machine() to elf_utils.py, and skips foreign-arch ELF files in the library linter to avoid QEMU segfaults and multi-GB core dumps. Unreviewed ~3.5 months; CLA check failing; issue #4373 still open.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"The underlying bug is still live on main: library_linter.py still calls load_dependencies() on every ELF file with no arch check, and issue #4373 remains open, so the PR is not stale-irrelevant. However it has had zero reviewer engagement for ~3.5 months (last activity 107 days ago, 0 comments, 0 reviewers), carries 6 unresolved review comments, and the Canonical CLA CI check is failing — a maintainer needs to review and unblock it.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"staleness":60,"complexity":40,"confidence":80},"age_days":120,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-05-15T22:38:59+00:00","updated_at":"2026-05-16T15:03:20+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":60,"complexity":40,"support_request":null,"confidence":80,"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":5945,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"5971","title":"Use Craft Application's Linter Service","author":"mr-cal","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/5971","summary":"Refactor to migrate snapcraft linters to craft-application's LinterService. Triaged and labeled; upstream framework (craft-application#907) is merged, but no code changes yet. Supersedes closed #5542.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is triaged (labeled Status: Triaged, Type: Refactor) and remains valid: no LinterService references exist in snapcraft code, and the upstream dependency craft-application#907 is now merged, unblocking the migration. The superseded issue #5542 was closed without implementation, and a parallel issue charmcraft#2546 is also open, confirming this is an active cross-project refactor.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":13.5,"staleness":60,"complexity":70,"confidence":75,"support_request":5},"age_days":234,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Refactor"],"created_at":"2026-01-21T18:16:46+00:00","updated_at":"2026-01-21T18:18:25+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":60,"complexity":70,"support_request":5,"confidence":75,"impact":45,"quick_win":13.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":13800,"project_name":"craft-grammar","source":"github","external_id":"125","title":"`for` grammar: support `else on` and `else for`","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-grammar/issues/125","summary":"Enhancement to support `else on` and `else for` statements in the `for` grammar, extending the existing `else` clause. Triaged by maintainer and tracked in Jira (CRAFT-4744); not yet implemented in the processor.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Triaged enhancement (Status: Triaged label, authored by maintainer lengau) with an internal Jira ticket CRAFT-4744, indicating active tracking. The requested `else on`/`else for` syntax is not yet implemented — `_processor.py` only defines `_ELSE_CLAUSE_PATTERN` (bare `else`) and `_ELSE_FAIL_PATTERN`, and `_handle_else` only attaches to `on`/`try` — so it remains a valid open feature, not stale-irrelevant.","scores":{"impact":42,"quick_win":18.9,"staleness":60,"complexity":55,"confidence":78,"support_request":5},"age_days":373,"labels":["Type: Enhancement","Status: Triaged"],"created_at":"2025-09-04T16:39:18+00:00","updated_at":"2025-09-13T01:07:07+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":60,"complexity":55,"support_request":5,"confidence":78,"impact":42,"quick_win":18.9,"has_related_links":true},{"id":13731,"project_name":"craft-cli","source":"github","external_id":"9","title":"Have a sub-char resolution in the progress bar","author":"facundobatista","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-cli/issues/9","summary":"Enhancement to give the progress bar sub-character resolution using eighth-block Unicode characters (▏▎▍▌▋▊▉█) instead of per-character granularity. Triaged and labeled; last activity was a bot syncing it to Jira (CRAFT-4789).","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is labeled 'Status: Triaged' and 'Type: Enhancement' and was filed by maintainer facundobatista, so it has been assessed and acknowledged. The only recent activity is a bot syncing it to Jira (CRAFT-4789) on 2025-09-17, with no evidence the sub-character progress bar was implemented elsewhere, so it remains a valid open enhancement.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":16.25,"staleness":60,"complexity":35,"confidence":65,"support_request":5},"age_days":1817,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2021-09-21T12:50:23+00:00","updated_at":"2025-09-17T21:05:33+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":60,"complexity":35,"support_request":5,"confidence":65,"impact":25,"quick_win":16.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":1594,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2546","title":"Use Craft Application's Linter Service","author":"mr-cal","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/2546","summary":"Refactor to migrate charmcraft's linters to craft-application's shared LinterService for consistent lint UX across craft apps. Triaged and open; upstream framework (craft-application#907) is merged, but no code changes yet and no human activity for ~7 months.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue carries maintainer labels (Status: Triaged, Type: Refactor) and remains fully applicable: charmcraft still uses its own linters.py/AnalysisService with no LinterService usage, while the upstream dependency craft-application#907 (LinterService framework) has been merged, making the refactor actionable now. Inactivity (~7 months, bot-only comments) is notable but the work is not obsolete, so it should stay open rather than be closed as stale.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":11.25,"staleness":60,"complexity":75,"confidence":82,"support_request":0},"age_days":234,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Refactor"],"created_at":"2026-01-21T18:14:47+00:00","updated_at":"2026-01-21T18:15:52+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":60,"complexity":75,"support_request":0,"confidence":82,"impact":45,"quick_win":11.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":1590,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2552","title":"docs: what are the values that the `source-type` can have?","author":"panlinux","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/2552","summary":"Docs gap: dump plugin page doesn't list valid source-type values. Values are documented in craft-parts PartSpec docstring (part_properties.rst) but not cross-referenced from the dump plugin page. Unlabelled, no maintainer response, 215 days old.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"No labels, no comments, no assignee, and no maintainer response in 215 days. The documentation gap is real — dump_plugin.rst in craft-parts still says source-type is 'optional, but recommended' without listing values — though the full values table (7z, deb, git, rpm, snap, tar, zip, local, file) exists in the PartSpec.source_type docstring rendered on the part_properties reference page. A maintainer needs to decide whether to add the values inline or add a cross-reference link.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":22.5,"staleness":60,"complexity":10,"confidence":75,"support_request":40},"age_days":230,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-01-25T21:55:32+00:00","updated_at":"2026-01-25T21:55:32+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":60,"complexity":10,"support_request":40,"confidence":75,"impact":25,"quick_win":22.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":1558,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2584","title":"Enable and integrate the Ruby plugin","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/2584","summary":"Feature request to enable craft-parts' Ruby plugin for Ruby-based charms; the team has no intention of implementing it themselves and is inviting external contributors. No activity for 175 days; the Ruby plugin is still unregistered in the current code.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is a triaged enhancement (labeled Type: Enhancement, authored by maintainer lengau) that explicitly invites external contributors and offers to review PRs, so it is not stale or unassessed. It remains applicable: charmcraft/parts/__init__.py still unregisters the 'ruby' plugin, and no PR or commit has implemented the requested work. Inactivity alone (~6 months) is expected for a community-contribution invitation and is not a reason to close.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":6.75,"staleness":60,"complexity":55,"confidence":80,"support_request":0},"age_days":190,"labels":["Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2026-03-06T16:43:01+00:00","updated_at":"2026-03-06T19:07:53+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":60,"complexity":55,"support_request":0,"confidence":80,"impact":15,"quick_win":6.75,"has_related_links":false},{"id":13295,"project_name":"craft-cli","source":"github","external_id":"445","title":"fix(printer): handle multiline permanent progress correctly","author":"gcomneno","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-cli/pull/445","summary":"Fixes multiline permanent progress rendering in the printer so each terminal line is fully cleared and multiline messages log as separate timestamped lines. Pending review (0 reviewers); CI mostly green.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"The fix is still relevant: current craft_cli/printer.py still writes the log as a single f\"{timestamp_str} {message.text}\\n\" string and _write_line_terminal only truncates multiline text to the last line, with no line-by-line clearing, and the test multiline_permanent_progress_overwrites_temporary_progress does not exist in the tree. It has 0 reviewers and no maintainer acknowledgement (only the author's CI note), so it needs a maintainer review rather than closure.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":24.75,"staleness":60,"complexity":45,"confidence":75},"age_days":143,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-04-23T03:59:02+00:00","updated_at":"2026-05-15T16:18:33+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":60,"complexity":45,"support_request":null,"confidence":75,"impact":45,"quick_win":24.75,"has_related_links":false},{"id":1593,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2547","title":"Charmcraft init migrated to InitService","author":"mr-cal","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/2547","summary":"Refactor to replace charmcraft's custom init command with craft-application's init command and InitService, deprecating --author/--force and extending InitService with template file renaming. Triaged, tracked in Jira, not yet implemented.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is properly triaged (Status: Triaged, Type: Refactor labels), filed by a maintainer, and synced to internal Jira tickets CHARMCRAFT-677/678, so it has clear ownership. I confirmed the work is still pending: charmcraft/application/commands/init.py still uses the old custom implementation with --author, --force, and --project-dir, and no InitService references exist in the codebase. Inactivity (~7 months, bot comments only) does not make it obsolete since the target behavior is still unimplemented.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":12.25,"staleness":60,"complexity":65,"confidence":80,"support_request":0},"age_days":234,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Refactor"],"created_at":"2026-01-21T18:20:08+00:00","updated_at":"2026-01-21T18:20:37+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":60,"complexity":65,"support_request":0,"confidence":80,"impact":35,"quick_win":12.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":11944,"project_name":"debcraft","source":"github","external_id":"55","title":"test: unit tests for control encoder and model","author":"Copilot","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/debcraft/pull/55","summary":"Adds 21 unit tests for the DebianControl model and control Encoder. CI green except Conventional Commits check; stalled ~9 months with unresolved merge conflicts the Copilot author cannot fix; maintainer asked for a rebase.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"lengau asked on 2025-12-06 to rebase and fix merge conflicts, and the Copilot author replied it cannot rebase or fetch main, so a human maintainer must resolve the conflicts manually; no activity since. cmatsuoka already signaled intent to land it ('We can land this directly on main after landing #54', now merged), so the PR remains relevant rather than stale-closable, and the author's explicit request for manual help puts the ball in the maintainer's court.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":18.75,"staleness":60,"complexity":25,"confidence":65},"age_days":289,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-11-27T22:56:02+00:00","updated_at":"2025-12-06T16:17:39+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":true,"staleness":60,"complexity":25,"support_request":null,"confidence":65,"impact":25,"quick_win":18.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":22268,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"817","title":"Local file changes are not detected","author":"mr-cal","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/817","summary":"Enhancement to detect local file changes (incl. permissions) for the dump plugin and mark the pull step dirty. Triaged, tracked as CRAFT-3268; maintainer confirmed no progress as of 2026-02-18.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Labeled Status: Triaged / Type: Enhancement and authored by maintainer mr-cal, who explicitly confirmed on 2026-02-18 'we haven't had any progress on this' — so it is acknowledged, valid, and still relevant (snapcraft#4984 depends on it). Code inspection shows local_source.check_if_outdated only compares mtime and marks steps 'outdated' (update), not the requested permission checks or 'dirty' (clean+rerun) marking, so the feature is only partially present and not fixed.","scores":{"impact":55,"quick_win":24.75,"staleness":60,"complexity":55,"confidence":75,"support_request":10},"age_days":754,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2024-08-19T14:50:57+00:00","updated_at":"2026-02-18T23:40:16+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":60,"complexity":55,"support_request":10,"confidence":75,"impact":55,"quick_win":24.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":21759,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1326","title":"Investigate support for fetching chisel slices","author":"bepri","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/1326","summary":"Investigation into supporting fetching Chisel slices as packages in fetch_stage_packages. Maintainer noted it requires chisel to separate download/unpack in cut command, deprioritized. Code still returns slice names without downloading them.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer lengau triaged and acknowledged the issue (2025-10-02), identifying the external blocker: chisel needs to support separating download and unpack steps of the cut command. The feature is still unimplemented in fetch_stage_packages (deb.py line 703-705 still returns slice names as-is), so the issue remains relevant despite ~11 months of inactivity.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":12.25,"staleness":60,"complexity":65,"confidence":78,"support_request":10},"age_days":354,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-09-23T15:21:08+00:00","updated_at":"2025-10-02T03:04:00+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":60,"complexity":65,"support_request":10,"confidence":78,"impact":35,"quick_win":12.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":39096,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"6270","title":"docs: remove references to core18","author":"medubelko","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/6270","summary":"Documentation cleanup to remove core18 references outside release information. Triaged, someone volunteered to work on it, and PR #6292 is addressing this.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is triaged (labels: Status: Triaged, Type: Documentation), a contributor (@munlicode) volunteered to work on it, and PR #6292 is actively addressing the core18 documentation cleanup. The issue should remain open until the PR is merged.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":35.0,"staleness":60,"complexity":30,"confidence":80,"support_request":0},"age_days":106,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Documentation"],"created_at":"2026-05-29T23:00:33+00:00","updated_at":"2026-06-15T06:39:27+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":60,"complexity":30,"support_request":0,"confidence":80,"impact":50,"quick_win":35.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":3802,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"319","title":"hard to run help to figure out your args","author":"jameinel","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/319","summary":"charmcraft's help command errors out when given extra/bad arguments (e.g. 'charmcraft help close --bad-args' or 'cmd --help extra'), instead of showing help for the named command. Maintainer acknowledged and filed craft-cli#68 to fix; still open and unaddressed.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer facundobatista acknowledged the issue (2021-11-03) and explicitly created canonical/craft-cli#68 (2022-03-07) to implement the desired behaviour, so it is triaged and valid. The underlying 'Too many parameters when requesting help' error still exists in craft_cli/dispatcher.py, so the issue remains relevant and is effectively blocked on the upstream craft-cli change rather than stale.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":60,"complexity":40,"confidence":85,"support_request":10},"age_days":1964,"labels":[],"created_at":"2021-04-27T12:15:18+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:18:32+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":60,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":85,"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":1928,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2204","title":"[3.4.3] Charmcraft fetch-lib fails with `Library None not found in Charmhub.`","author":"phvalguima","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/2204","summary":"fetch-lib (all) fails with cryptic 'Library None not found in Charmhub' when a local lib is unpublished; maintainers confirmed the cause and unhelpful message, but the buggy error path in store.py remains unfixed in current code.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainers lucabello and DnPlas confirmed the root cause (unpublished lib with a fake/invalid LIBID) and agreed the message is unhelpful, so it is triaged and valid. I verified the current code at store.py:1605 still raises `Library {parsed_args.library} not found in Charmhub` inside the per-lib loop, so the bug is reproducible and not stale-irrelevant; a Copilot auto-fix attempt on 2025-12-03 failed on token permissions, leaving no fix PR.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":31.5,"staleness":60,"complexity":30,"confidence":85,"support_request":10},"age_days":556,"labels":["Type: Bug"],"created_at":"2025-03-05T16:06:19+00:00","updated_at":"2025-12-03T19:20:32+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":60,"complexity":30,"support_request":10,"confidence":85,"impact":45,"quick_win":31.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":2341,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"1788","title":"`fetch-lib` should work from anywhere","author":"PietroPasotti","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/1788","summary":"charmcraft fetch-lib (3.1.1+) requires a charmcraft.yaml and fails outside a charm project, breaking workflows that fetch libs for inspection. Maintainer acknowledged Sep 2024, explicitly kept it open but deferred past that pulse; charmlibs commands are now deprecated in favor of Python packages.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer @lengau explicitly stated on 2024-09-09: 'I'm going to keep this open, but it isn't making the bugfixes for this pulse', so the issue is triaged and acknowledged and should stay open. The root cause is visible in code (FetchLibCommand sets always_load_project = True in store.py), but the fix is now entangled with the deprecation of Charmhub-hosted charm libraries (commit b93737a1, #2691), making it a product decision rather than a simple bugfix.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":12.0,"staleness":60,"complexity":40,"confidence":75,"support_request":10},"age_days":768,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-08-05T13:26:50+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:18:14+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":60,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":75,"impact":20,"quick_win":12.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":15598,"project_name":"snapcraft-rocks","source":"github","external_id":"112","title":"Provide snapcraft-rocks based on core26","author":"brunvonlope","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft-rocks/issues/112","summary":"Request for a snapcraft-rocks image based on the newly released core26 base, needed for GIMP's CI rebuilds; repo currently only ships core22/core24 rocks. No labels, no maintainer response, inactive for 119 days.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is unlabelled, unassigned, and has zero maintainer interaction in 119 days, so it has never been assessed. It is a valid, still-relevant feature request (no core26 rock exists in the repo, per grep and README.rst which only lists 8_core24), and there is direct precedent for adding a new-base rock (PR #21 for core24), so it warrants triage rather than closure.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":31.5,"staleness":60,"complexity":30,"confidence":80,"support_request":15},"age_days":131,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-05-04T19:56:02+00:00","updated_at":"2026-05-04T19:56:02+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":60,"complexity":30,"support_request":15,"confidence":80,"impact":45,"quick_win":31.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":2039,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2090","title":"Docs: Update links to juju.is/docs","author":"medubelko","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/2090","summary":"Update juju.is/docs links to new docs platform. Partially done via PRs #2095, #2136, #2792, but ~25 juju.is/docs links remain in Python source. Target URL has since shifted from RTD to documentation.ubuntu.com. No maintainer engagement beyond Jira bot.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"No labels, no assignee, and only Jira-sync bot comments (CRAFT-3953/3954) — no human maintainer has triaged or prioritized this. The specific ask (migrate to canonical-juju.readthedocs-hosted.com) is outdated since docs moved to documentation.ubuntu.com (commit be3bf003, PR #2406), but ~25 juju.is/docs links still remain in charmcraft/*.py source files, so the underlying problem persists and needs reassessment.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":16.25,"staleness":60,"complexity":35,"confidence":75,"support_request":5},"age_days":603,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-01-17T19:44:25+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:17:43+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":60,"complexity":35,"support_request":5,"confidence":75,"impact":25,"quick_win":16.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":5553,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"121","title":"Allow setting of a working directory for the resulting ROCK in rockcraft.yaml","author":"gruyaume","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/121","summary":"Feature request for a working-directory field in rockcraft.yaml to avoid cd wrappers. Core need addressed by service-level working-dir added in PR #305; maintainer triaged in Feb 2026 asking reporter to confirm if service-level is sufficient, no response in ~6 months.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The core use case (avoiding cd wrappers) is resolved by service-level working-dir merged in PR #305 (commit 4594740f). Maintainer gcomneno triaged on 2026-02-26 asking the reporter to confirm whether service-level working-dir suffices or if OCI image-level WorkingDir is specifically needed; no response after ~6 months. The remaining narrower request (OCI WorkingDir) is unconfirmed and the issue is 1419 days old.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":19.5,"staleness":60,"complexity":35,"confidence":78,"support_request":10},"age_days":1431,"labels":[],"created_at":"2022-10-12T19:16:13+00:00","updated_at":"2026-02-26T07:29:44+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":60,"complexity":35,"support_request":10,"confidence":78,"impact":30,"quick_win":19.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":21768,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1317","title":"Migrate to pathlib","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/1317","summary":"Refactor to replace legacy os.path usage with pathlib. Triaged; a contributor took it on in Oct 2025 but no PR has landed since. PR #1424 partially migrated the codebase, yet ~59 os.path usages remain, so the work is incomplete.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is triaged (Status: Triaged label) and maintainer lengau explicitly accepted contributor EdmilsonRodrigues's offer on 2025-10-23, so it has maintainer buy-in. The task remains genuinely applicable: os.path still appears in ~59 places (collisions.py, organize.py, apt_cache.py, etc.) even after PR #1424 'refactor: use pathlib internally' was merged. Inactivity for ~9 months is notable, but the work is unfinished and still valid, so it should stay open rather than be closed as stale.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":11.0,"staleness":60,"complexity":45,"confidence":80,"support_request":0},"age_days":360,"labels":["Type: Refactor","Status: Triaged"],"created_at":"2025-09-17T20:47:15+00:00","updated_at":"2025-12-06T05:18:56+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":60,"complexity":45,"support_request":0,"confidence":80,"impact":20,"quick_win":11.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":39812,"project_name":"craft-providers","source":"github","external_id":"901","title":"Remove mypy and pyright","author":"mr-cal","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-providers/issues/901","summary":"Enhancement to remove mypy and pyright type checkers in favor of ty, following similar work in snapcraft#6007. Issue created by maintainer but has had no maintainer response or comments in 136 days.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue was created by a maintainer (mr-cal), is clearly scoped, and references similar work done in snapcraft#6007. The task remains relevant as mypy and pyright targets are still present in common.mk (lines 153-171). The issue should remain open for someone to implement the migration to ty.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":35.0,"staleness":60,"complexity":30,"confidence":75,"support_request":0},"age_days":218,"labels":["Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2026-02-06T15:35:52+00:00","updated_at":"2026-04-22T02:48:24+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":60,"complexity":30,"support_request":0,"confidence":75,"impact":50,"quick_win":35.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":13619,"project_name":"craft-cli","source":"github","external_id":"121","title":"Provide a way to merge other log file into current one","author":"facundobatista","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-cli/issues/121","summary":"Feature request from maintainer to add a merge_logs_from method to Emitter for merging external log files (e.g. subprocess output) into the current log. Unlabelled, no comments, no implementation found in codebase after ~4 years.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no comments, no assignee, and no sign of categorisation or prioritisation despite being filed by a maintainer. The feature (merge_logs_from) is confirmed absent from craft_cli/messages.py — open_stream handles subprocess output to the terminal but does not merge into the log file. The request remains technically valid but needs a maintainer to scope, label, and decide priority.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":19.25,"staleness":60,"complexity":45,"confidence":75,"support_request":0},"age_days":1458,"labels":[],"created_at":"2022-09-15T12:28:41+00:00","updated_at":"2025-03-10T18:59:11+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":60,"complexity":45,"support_request":0,"confidence":75,"impact":35,"quick_win":19.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":21519,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1570","title":"ci: split QA workflows by runner","author":"lengau","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/pull/1570","summary":"Splits QA workflow into separate GitHub-hosted and self-hosted runner files. 117 days old, zero review activity, 11 CI checks failing on self-hosted platforms (s390x, ppc64el, resolute, arm64). Not yet merged; qa.yaml in repo still unsplit.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"The PR is from a maintainer but has had zero review activity in 117 days and 11 CI checks are failing, all on the self-hosted platforms (noble s390x/ppc64el, resolute, jammy arm64) that this PR specifically reorganizes. A maintainer needs to investigate whether the failures are pre-existing or introduced by the split before this can be merged. The repo's qa.yaml still shows the unsplit structure, confirming the change has not landed.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":13.75,"staleness":60,"complexity":45,"confidence":78},"age_days":129,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-05-06T20:07:47+00:00","updated_at":"2026-05-06T22:38:24+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":60,"complexity":45,"support_request":null,"confidence":78,"impact":25,"quick_win":13.75,"has_related_links":false},{"id":2233,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"1896","title":"Create a way to adjust the operator endpoint when not using the charm plugin","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/1896","summary":"Feature request to allow configuring the operator entrypoint when auto-generating the dispatch file without the charm plugin, for feature parity. A TODO in lifecycle.py still references #1896, confirming it is unimplemented. No labels, no maintainer triage, last activity ~12.5 months ago.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no assignee, and no maintainer response beyond the Jira-sync bot comment. Although a TODO in charmcraft/services/lifecycle.py (line 71) explicitly references #1896 and the author is a maintainer, the issue itself has not been categorised, prioritised, or assigned in the tracker. It should be triaged to determine whether it will be scheduled or closed as out-of-scope.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":21.0,"staleness":60,"complexity":40,"confidence":78,"support_request":10},"age_days":731,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-09-11T15:37:19+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:17:59+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":60,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":78,"impact":35,"quick_win":21.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":3414,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"709","title":"Don't upload if unauthorized","author":"sed-i","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/709","summary":"Charmcraft upload should fail fast on unauthorized/permission errors before pushing bytes. Original 401 case fixed by PR #1052 (whoami check before upload). 2024 comment confirms publisher/collaborator permission check is still missing; no maintainer response since.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"PR #1052 (commit 422b8b90) added _check_authorized() before push_file, fixing the original 401-on-expired-credentials case. However, the 2024-09-20 comment from @lengau shows the permission-check aspect (publisher/collaborator) is still unaddressed, and no maintainer has responded to that re-scoping. The issue needs a maintainer to decide whether to keep it open for the narrower permission-check scope or close it and file a new issue.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":19.5,"staleness":60,"complexity":35,"confidence":75,"support_request":10},"age_days":1647,"labels":[],"created_at":"2022-03-10T20:19:03+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:18:35+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":60,"complexity":35,"support_request":10,"confidence":75,"impact":30,"quick_win":19.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":4127,"project_name":"imagecraft","source":"github","external_id":"340","title":"fix: Avoid races with udev and loop devices","author":"mwhudson","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/imagecraft/pull/340","summary":"Adds flock LOCK_EX on the whole-disk node during mkfs and across loop partition mounts to fix udev/loop-device races; supersedes #330's approach. Open 118 days with no review or comments; CI mostly green but lint, title policy, and snap-builds checks failing.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"The PR has sat 118 days with zero maintainer interaction (0 reviewers, 0 comments) and three failing CI checks (lint / files, Conventional Commits title policy, snap-builds) that the author should address. It is not stale-irrelevant: the udev race it targets is still present in the codebase (services/image.py relies on a _wait_for_partition_nodes polling workaround, and the related #330 is still open with 6 unresolved comments), so a maintainer review of this alternative flock-based approach is warranted.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":15.75,"staleness":60,"complexity":65,"confidence":78},"age_days":131,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-05-05T03:55:49+00:00","updated_at":"2026-05-05T04:05:42+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":60,"complexity":65,"support_request":null,"confidence":78,"impact":45,"quick_win":15.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":4774,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"901","title":"Rockcraft fails to run on FIPS-enabled hosts","author":"cjdcordeiro","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/901","summary":"Rockcraft fails to start on FIPS-enabled hosts because craft-parts npm_plugin.py imports requests at module level, triggering urllib3 SSLContext creation that FIPS crypto libraries reject. Maintainers confirmed the bug and shared references in June 2025; no fix or labels applied since.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainers clay-lake and tigarmo explicitly confirmed the bug and provided actionable references (certbot/certbot#10044 workaround, Canonical FIPS-snap blog post) in June 2025, giving the issue clear maintainer buy-in. The root cause is a module-level `import requests` in craft-parts npm_plugin.py that forces urllib3 to build an SSLContext at import time, which FIPS crypto libraries reject. No labels or assignee have been added and no fix commit was found in rockcraft or craft-parts, but the issue is not outdated and remains a valid blocker for FIPS-host users.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":25.0,"staleness":60,"complexity":50,"confidence":72,"support_request":10},"age_days":452,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-06-17T13:28:46+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:12:35+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":60,"complexity":50,"support_request":10,"confidence":72,"impact":50,"quick_win":25.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":16268,"project_name":"starflow","source":"github","external_id":"116","title":"docs: Add a how-to for publishing an app's snap","author":"lengau","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/starflow/pull/116","summary":"Adds a docs how-to for publishing an app's snap, covering the debcraft workflow so far; author plans to add beta/candidate/stable channel info later. All CI passing, 0 reviewers, 12 unresolved review comments, inactive ~6 months.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"The PR carries 12 unresolved review comments with 0 assigned reviewers and no activity for ~6 months, and the author (a maintainer) explicitly deferred beta/candidate/stable content to a later cycle, so it is incomplete and needs review/updates before it can land. All CI checks pass and the change is a small docs-only diff, so it is not stale-irrelevant or unmergeable.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":22.5,"staleness":60,"complexity":10,"confidence":55},"age_days":205,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-02-20T01:22:21+00:00","updated_at":"2026-03-05T19:05:00+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":60,"complexity":10,"support_request":null,"confidence":55,"impact":25,"quick_win":22.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":4992,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"683","title":"File capabilities (xattrs) are not preserved in final ROCK image layers.","author":"aznashwan","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/683","summary":"File capabilities (xattrs) set via setcap during ROCK build are dropped in final image layers because Python tarfile does not preserve xattrs. Acknowledged by maintainer; a fix PR (#1016) is open but stalled with unresolved review comments and CI failures.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer @cjdcordeiro acknowledged the issue on 2024-08-27 and linked the original Matrix discussion. The bug is confirmed still present in rockcraft/layers.py which uses Python's tarfile module (no xattr support). PR #1016 explicitly targets this issue ('closes #683') but is stalled with 5 unresolved review comments and CI failures, so the issue should remain open until a fix is merged.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":15.75,"staleness":60,"complexity":65,"confidence":78,"support_request":5},"age_days":747,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-08-27T09:22:53+00:00","updated_at":"2024-08-27T14:30:34+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":60,"complexity":65,"support_request":5,"confidence":78,"impact":45,"quick_win":15.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":16266,"project_name":"starflow","source":"github","external_id":"118","title":"Contributors script sometimes adds @unknown to the thank-you section.","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/starflow/issues/118","summary":"Contributors script (tools/contributors.py) adds a literal 'unknown' entry to the thank-you section when the GitHub API returns no author login for a commit. Bug confirmed still present at line 254; no fix committed. 178 days old, 0 comments, labelled Type: Bug but no maintainer response.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has the Type: Bug label but zero comments, no assignee, and no maintainer response in 178 days. The bug is confirmed still present in the codebase (line 254 of tools/contributors.py sets author = 'unknown' when commit['author']['login'] is missing), and no subsequent PR (#165, #170) addressed it. The project is active (PRs up to #170), so the issue is not stale-irrelevant, but it has not been assessed or prioritized by a maintainer.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":17.0,"staleness":60,"complexity":15,"confidence":85,"support_request":5},"age_days":190,"labels":["Type: Bug"],"created_at":"2026-03-06T22:04:25+00:00","updated_at":"2026-03-06T22:05:18+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":60,"complexity":15,"support_request":5,"confidence":85,"impact":20,"quick_win":17.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":6327,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"5552","title":"`primed-stage-packages` isn't in manifest.yaml when using override-prime","author":"mr-cal","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/5552","summary":"primed-stage-packages missing from manifest.yaml when override-prime is used; triaged bug blocked by upstream craft-parts issue #1122 which remains open. No fix implemented in ~15 months.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is triaged (labeled Status: Triaged, Type: Bug) and explicitly blocked by upstream craft-parts issue #1122 which is still open. The current snapcraft code (parts.py:278) still delegates to craft-parts' get_primed_stage_packages, and no fix commits were found in either repo. The problem remains reproducible and relevant to core22+ users.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":19.25,"staleness":60,"complexity":45,"confidence":75,"support_request":5},"age_days":459,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Bug"],"created_at":"2025-06-10T16:51:26+00:00","updated_at":"2025-06-18T15:38:11+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":60,"complexity":45,"support_request":5,"confidence":75,"impact":35,"quick_win":19.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":6281,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"5599","title":"docs: document application command-chain","author":"zyga","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/pull/5599","summary":"Docs PR adding a command-chain explanation page (+79/-0, 2 files). Approved, CI green, but 13 unresolved review comments. Blocker PR #5603 (craft-parts 2.16.0) has since been merged. Last activity 360 days ago.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"The explicit blocker (PR #5603, craft-parts 2.16.0) has been merged and all CI checks pass, but 13 unresolved review comments remain and the last activity was 360 days ago. A maintainer should triage whether those comments are addressed or the PR can be merged as-is given the approval from @agherzan.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":22.5,"staleness":60,"complexity":10,"confidence":72},"age_days":436,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-07-03T18:49:01+00:00","updated_at":"2025-09-05T21:13:56+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":60,"complexity":10,"support_request":null,"confidence":72,"impact":25,"quick_win":22.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":6162,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"5726","title":"docs: [debug a snap] mention that snappy-debug is a snap, and fix broken 'Debugging snaps' link","author":"tonyespy","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/5726","summary":"Docs request for 'Debug a snap' page: add an 'install the snap' step to the snappy-debug instructions, and fix the broken 'Debugging snaps' link. The broken link appears already fixed via intersphinx (PR #6165), but the missing install step is still absent from the current docs.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has two parts. The broken 'Debugging snaps' link appears already resolved: the current file uses :external+snap:ref:`how-to-guides-fix-common-issues-debug-snaps` (commit e81c28a30, PR #6165 'docs: link to snap docs with intersphinx'). However, the first request — adding an 'install the snap' step to the snappy-debug instructions — is still unaddressed; the current list still begins with '1. In a terminal, run snappy-debug.' with no install step. Because one actionable item remains open and the fix is trivial, keep it open for a small doc patch.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":60,"complexity":10,"confidence":55,"support_request":20},"age_days":383,"labels":["Type: Documentation"],"created_at":"2025-08-25T20:12:24+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-26T20:17:13+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":60,"complexity":10,"support_request":20,"confidence":55,"impact":20,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":39216,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"1261","title":"stage-packages with deb packages create /etc/ssl/certs/ca-certificates.crt file in final rock","author":"javierdelapuente","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/1261","summary":"Bug where stage-packages creates /etc/ssl/certs/ca-certificates.crt from build machine, breaking 12-factor extensions. Fixed by PR #1264.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has been resolved by PR #1264 which excludes the conflicting /etc/ssl/certs/ca-certificates.crt file when both ca-certificates_data and deb ca-certificates are staged. The original problem is no longer reproducible in the current codebase.","scores":{"impact":80,"quick_win":40.0,"staleness":60,"complexity":50,"confidence":85,"support_request":10},"age_days":87,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-06-18T06:50:14+00:00","updated_at":"2026-07-06T09:37:43+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":60,"complexity":50,"support_request":10,"confidence":85,"impact":80,"quick_win":40.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":11911,"project_name":"debcraft","source":"github","external_id":"88","title":"Debcraft snap FTBFS on armhf, s390x due to libgit2 issue","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/debcraft/issues/88","summary":"Debcraft snap FTBFS on armhf and s390x because git2/sys/errors.h is missing when pygit2 builds from source against system libgit2. Triaged as a bug by a maintainer with internal Jira tickets; no fix landed yet, snapcraft.yaml still depends on libgit2-dev.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is labelled 'Status: Triaged' and 'Type: Bug', was filed by a maintainer with concrete Launchpad buildlogs, and the underlying problem is still live: snap/snapcraft.yaml still declares libgit2-1.7/libgit2-dev and has had no changes since it was added (#76), while pygit2 1.14.1 in uv.lock has no armhf/s390x wheels. Inactivity is only ~6 months and the issue is not outdated, so it should stay open pending a fix (e.g. building libgit2 from source or vendoring headers).","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":20.25,"staleness":60,"complexity":55,"confidence":75,"support_request":0},"age_days":204,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Bug"],"created_at":"2026-02-20T14:53:54+00:00","updated_at":"2026-02-20T14:54:05+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":60,"complexity":55,"support_request":0,"confidence":75,"impact":45,"quick_win":20.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":39453,"project_name":"craft-platforms","source":"github","external_id":"234","title":"refactor: Align build-for: all validation rules in charm build planner","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-platforms/issues/234","summary":"Refactor charm build planner to validate build-for: all usage consistently with default build planner","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is well-structured and actionable, but has no labels, no maintainer response, and no assignee. It needs to be triaged by the team to prioritize and assign it. The validation logic already exists in _platforms.py (_validate_build_for_all) with corresponding error classes in _errors.py, making this a clear refactoring task.","scores":{"impact":60,"quick_win":36.0,"staleness":60,"complexity":40,"confidence":75,"support_request":10},"age_days":89,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-06-15T17:13:28+00:00","updated_at":"2026-06-15T17:13:28+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":60,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":75,"impact":60,"quick_win":36.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":39768,"project_name":"craft-providers","source":"github","external_id":"116","title":"Better parameter documentation for `execute_run` -> `command`","author":"jugmac00","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-providers/issues/116","summary":"Documentation request to clarify `command` parameter escaping in `execute_run`. Maintainer explained `shlex.join()` prevents shell metacharacters for security. Open for ~4 years.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Valid documentation improvement acknowledged by a maintainer. The maintainer clarified the security constraint behind `shlex.join()`, but the parameter docs still lack clear guidance on list formatting and escaping, warranting a doc update.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":36.0,"staleness":60,"complexity":10,"confidence":75,"support_request":20},"age_days":1599,"labels":["Type: Documentation"],"created_at":"2022-04-28T05:54:12+00:00","updated_at":"2026-04-22T02:50:28+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":60,"complexity":10,"support_request":20,"confidence":75,"impact":40,"quick_win":36.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":2796,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"1332","title":"(CI) Parallel build test is flaky","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/1332","summary":"Flaky parallel-build spread test (concurrent base-instance creation fails on Google CI). Mitigated by moving to weekly CI in #1600, but root cause unfixed and test still marked flaky. No labels, comments, or assignee after ~3 years.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"PR #1600 (commit a1d285c7) moved the test to weekly CI as a mitigation, but task.yaml still carries 'manual: true # This test is somewhat flaky' and no root-cause fix for the concurrent base-instance race has landed. The issue has no labels, no comments, and no assignee after ~3 years, so a maintainer needs to decide whether to close it as mitigated or invest in fixing the underlying race.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":9.0,"staleness":60,"complexity":55,"confidence":75,"support_request":0},"age_days":1061,"labels":[],"created_at":"2023-10-17T17:09:08+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:18:19+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":60,"complexity":55,"support_request":0,"confidence":75,"impact":20,"quick_win":9.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":11948,"project_name":"debcraft","source":"github","external_id":"51","title":"Support compression algorithms other than zstd","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/debcraft/issues/51","summary":"Low-priority feature request to support compression algorithms other than zstd for deb tarballs. Maintainer filed and scoped design requirements (per-tarball and per-package overrides) but no implementation or further activity in ~9 months.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The author (maintainer lengau) explicitly triaged this with design notes covering three requirements (snapcraft-style default, separate control/data algorithms, per-package overrides) and labelled it low priority. Code still hardcodes zstd in makedeb.py with no schema field for compression, confirming it remains unimplemented and relevant. No reason to close — it is a valid, scoped, low-priority enhancement.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":6.0,"staleness":60,"complexity":60,"confidence":75,"support_request":5},"age_days":292,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-11-24T17:07:01+00:00","updated_at":"2025-11-24T17:21:35+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":60,"complexity":60,"support_request":5,"confidence":75,"impact":15,"quick_win":6.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":39606,"project_name":"imagecraft","source":"github","external_id":"365","title":"Clean the overlay","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/imagecraft/issues/365","summary":"Feature request to add overlay cleanup (apt-get clean, clear /tmp, /var/tmp, /run) before priming. No maintainer engagement, no labels, untriaged.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no maintainer comments, and no assignee after 72 days. The mmdebstrap_plugin.py has a _get_cleanup_commands() method but does not include the requested cleanup (apt-get clean, /tmp, /var/tmp, /run). This is a valid feature request that needs maintainer assessment before any action.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"staleness":60,"complexity":40,"confidence":75,"support_request":20},"age_days":80,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-06-24T15:50:10+00:00","updated_at":"2026-06-24T15:50:10+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":60,"complexity":40,"support_request":20,"confidence":75,"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":6257,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"5624","title":"Add a pydantic validator for common-id","author":"mr-cal","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/5624","summary":"Enhancement to add a pydantic validator for the common-id field (per appstream spec) to catch invalid values early. Triaged; PR #5974 targets it but is stalled with failing CI, and the validator is absent from main.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is triaged (Status: Triaged, Type: Enhancement) and the feature is confirmed unimplemented — no field_validator for common_id exists in snapcraft/models/project.py (only autostart/command/etc. are validated). PR #5974 explicitly targets this issue but has been open 221 days with no author activity, 3 unresolved review comments, and failing CI, so the work is stalled yet the underlying request remains valid and unimplemented.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":24.5,"staleness":60,"complexity":30,"confidence":70,"support_request":5},"age_days":422,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2025-07-17T19:44:53+00:00","updated_at":"2025-07-17T20:14:11+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":60,"complexity":30,"support_request":5,"confidence":70,"impact":35,"quick_win":24.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":12152,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"922","title":"Reference documentation about services in general","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/issues/922","summary":"Documentation task to expand and rename docs/reference/services/app.rst to better describe services in general, making AppService secondary. Triaged with Jira ticket CRAFT-4802, but no work done in 340 days.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is labeled 'Status: Triaged' with a Jira ticket (CRAFT-4802) and a maintainer comment from medubelko outlining the service structure. The file docs/reference/services/app.rst still exists unchanged with AppService as the primary topic, confirming the work is incomplete. While 340 days of inactivity is notable, the task remains relevant and was explicitly triaged by maintainers.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":21.0,"staleness":60,"complexity":30,"confidence":70,"support_request":0},"age_days":352,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Documentation"],"created_at":"2025-09-25T16:54:03+00:00","updated_at":"2025-09-25T16:56:53+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":60,"complexity":30,"support_request":0,"confidence":70,"impact":30,"quick_win":21.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":12092,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"982","title":"Publish testcraft from PRs to relevant branches","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/issues/982","summary":"CI enhancement to publish testcraft snap from PRs/main to dedicated latest/edge branches with install-command PR comments. Triaged by maintainer, blocked on canonical/craft-actions#48 (still open), no activity in 256 days.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is triaged (Status: Triaged label), authored by maintainer lengau, and explicitly blocked on canonical/craft-actions#48 which is still open. No implementation exists in the repo (no matching workflow or commits referencing craft-application-<pr#> branches). It remains a valid enhancement that simply cannot proceed until the dependency is resolved.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":22.0,"staleness":60,"complexity":45,"confidence":78,"support_request":0},"age_days":268,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2025-12-18T20:42:24+00:00","updated_at":"2025-12-18T20:42:49+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":60,"complexity":45,"support_request":0,"confidence":78,"impact":40,"quick_win":22.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":5898,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"6022","title":"Remove errors for removed commands","author":"mr-cal","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/6022","summary":"Cleanup task to remove RemovedCommand errors and --experimental-login/--with argument errors for commands removed in Snapcraft 9, targeted for Snapcraft 10. Triaged by a maintainer but not yet implemented; the errors still exist in the codebase.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is explicitly triaged (Status: Triaged, Type: Cleanup labels, filed by maintainer mr-cal) and I confirmed the target code is still present: names.py, account.py, and 10 other command files still raise errors.RemovedCommand or 'no longer supported' ArgumentParsingErrors, so the task remains applicable to the Snapcraft 10 release. Inactivity is only ~6.7 months and limited to a Jira-sync bot comment, with no sign the work was superseded.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":9.75,"staleness":60,"complexity":35,"confidence":85,"support_request":0},"age_days":215,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Cleanup"],"created_at":"2026-02-09T15:35:06+00:00","updated_at":"2026-02-09T18:22:03+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":60,"complexity":35,"support_request":0,"confidence":85,"impact":15,"quick_win":9.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":39797,"project_name":"craft-providers","source":"github","external_id":"665","title":"Add a callback hook to allow users to configure a base on warmup before running any apt/snap commands","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-providers/issues/665","summary":"Enhancement request to add a callback hook during warmup for apt configuration before apt commands execute","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Valid enhancement request from 23 months ago that remains applicable for configuring apt (e.g., proxies) before apt commands run. The current warmup() method in craft_providers/base.py has no such callback hook, and the use case (enabling fetch service to intercept initial apt update) is still relevant. No evidence of implementation or rejection found.","scores":{"impact":60,"quick_win":36.0,"staleness":60,"complexity":40,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":717,"labels":["Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2024-09-25T16:48:36+00:00","updated_at":"2026-04-22T02:48:40+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":60,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":60,"quick_win":36.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":21830,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1255","title":"Make tests platform-agnostic","author":"bepri","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/1255","summary":"Tests have hardcoded amd64 strings preventing execution on other architectures. CI runners for arm/s390x/ppc64el have been added, but 45 hardcoded amd64 references remain in test files. Triaged, no recent activity in ~12 months.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is triaged (Status: Triaged, Type: Enhancement) and the underlying problem persists: 45 hardcoded 'amd64' strings remain in test files (test_deb.py, test_npm_plugin.py, test_environment.py, etc.). While CI has been expanded to arm/s390x/ppc64el runners via commits like #1279, #1276, #1303, #1311, and #1568, the actual test code cleanup to remove arch-specific assumptions is still outstanding. The issue remains relevant and actionable.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":20.25,"staleness":60,"complexity":55,"confidence":72,"support_request":0},"age_days":374,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2025-09-03T20:39:47+00:00","updated_at":"2025-09-03T21:31:23+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":60,"complexity":55,"support_request":0,"confidence":72,"impact":45,"quick_win":20.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":39455,"project_name":"craft-platforms","source":"github","external_id":"231","title":"refactor: Make DistroBase hashable","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-platforms/issues/231","summary":"DistroBase is a frozen dataclass with custom __eq__ but no __hash__, making it unhashable. Issue created 81 days ago with no labels or maintainer comments.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is well-structured with a clear description of the problem (DistroBase overrides __eq__ without __hash__, making it unhashable) but has no labels, no maintainer comments, and no assignee after 81 days. A grep for __hash__ in the repo returned no matches, confirming the fix hasn't been implemented. This needs maintainer triage to prioritize and label appropriately.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":34.0,"staleness":60,"complexity":15,"confidence":75,"support_request":5},"age_days":89,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-06-15T17:10:40+00:00","updated_at":"2026-06-15T17:12:44+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":60,"complexity":15,"support_request":5,"confidence":75,"impact":40,"quick_win":34.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":5304,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"371","title":"Add a spread test for build-secrets","author":"tigarmo","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/371","summary":"Task to add a spread test verifying build-secrets support in rockcraft. Blocked by craft-application#100, which is now resolved. No labels, no comments, no progress in ~3 years despite active project.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The blocking dependency canonical/craft-application#100 is now closed (implemented in PR #104), making this task actionable. However, the issue has no labels, no comments, and no assignee despite being ~3 years old, and the project has since added many other spread tests (e.g. #1199, #1293) without addressing this one. It needs formal triage to be prioritized or closed if no longer relevant.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":28.0,"staleness":60,"complexity":20,"confidence":75,"support_request":0},"age_days":1069,"labels":[],"created_at":"2023-10-09T13:00:37+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:12:55+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":60,"complexity":20,"support_request":0,"confidence":75,"impact":35,"quick_win":28.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":2117,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2012","title":"Charmcraft snap thinks `/cache` is the cache directory if snapd doesn't set `SNAP_USER_COMMON`","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/2012","summary":"Charmcraft snap uses unwritable /cache as XDG_CACHE_HOME when snapd fails to set SNAP_USER_COMMON. Listed as a known issue in 3.4 release notes, still unfixed in current code, blocked by upstream snapd bug.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is explicitly listed in the 3.4 release notes as a known issue 'scheduled to be fixed in upcoming patch releases', confirming maintainer awareness. The root cause is an upstream snapd bug (LP#2090938) that prevents SNAP_USER_COMMON from being set, and the snapcraft.yaml still contains the unguarded $SNAP_USER_COMMON/cache reference. It should remain open until either snapd is fixed or charmcraft adds a fallback.","scores":{"impact":55,"quick_win":33.0,"staleness":60,"complexity":40,"confidence":75,"support_request":5},"age_days":648,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-12-03T16:20:48+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:18:03+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":60,"complexity":40,"support_request":5,"confidence":75,"impact":55,"quick_win":33.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":22067,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1018","title":"Provide a way to mimic a build host when expanding an environment","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/1018","summary":"Enhancement request to let expand_environment mimic a specific build architecture, useful for verifying expanded environment values. Triaged by a maintainer, open and unimplemented; last activity was a bot Jira-ticket comment ~12 months ago.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is explicitly triaged (labels 'Status: Triaged', 'Type: Enhancement') and filed by a maintainer, and I verified at current HEAD that expand_environment in craft_parts/executor/environment.py still lacks any architecture-mimic option, so the request remains applicable. Inactivity is only ~12 months and consists solely of a Jira-sync bot comment, which is not grounds to close a valid, still-relevant enhancement.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":21.0,"staleness":60,"complexity":40,"confidence":80,"support_request":0},"age_days":570,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2025-02-20T00:05:29+00:00","updated_at":"2025-09-03T20:42:16+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":60,"complexity":40,"support_request":0,"confidence":80,"impact":35,"quick_win":21.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":6920,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"4958","title":"Recommend using newer versions of snapcraft","author":"mr-cal","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/4958","summary":"Enhancement to have Snapcraft recommend newer versions (9.x) for core22/core24/core26 bases. Triaged by maintainer with implementation guidance; open PR #6240 targets it but is stalled with unresolved review comments and failing CI.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is triaged (labels 'good first issue', 'Status: Triaged') and maintainer mr-cal gave concrete implementation guidance on 2026-05-05 (add a base-checking function near application.py:175, adapt the get_esm_error_for_base unit test, branch off hotfix/8.14). A contributor has claimed it and open PR #6240 explicitly closes #4958, so it is valid, scoped, and in progress — not stale or a support request.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":18.75,"staleness":58,"complexity":25,"confidence":80,"support_request":10},"age_days":761,"labels":["good first issue","Status: Triaged","Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2024-08-12T19:45:12+00:00","updated_at":"2026-05-05T14:54:08+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":58,"complexity":25,"support_request":10,"confidence":80,"impact":25,"quick_win":18.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":12824,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"249","title":"remote build: provide a way to clean up all of a user's remote builds","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/issues/249","summary":"Enhancement request for a clean-remote-builds command that deletes all stopped remote builds in the user's Launchpad remote-build project. Triaged by a maintainer and synced to internal ticket CRAFT-2558, but the command is not yet implemented.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is triaged (labels 'Status: Triaged', 'Type: Enhancement') and filed by a maintainer, and I verified the requested clean-remote-builds command does not exist in craft_application/commands/remote.py nor in the remotebuild service, which only cleans up the current build's recipe/repository. Remote builds are still marked experimental in the code and docs, so the manual-cleanup pain point remains valid; inactivity alone (last real activity was the triage, with only a bot Jira-sync comment 215 days ago) does not make it irrelevant.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":19.25,"staleness":58,"complexity":45,"confidence":78,"support_request":5},"age_days":928,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2024-02-27T22:27:53+00:00","updated_at":"2026-01-28T18:33:00+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":58,"complexity":45,"support_request":5,"confidence":78,"impact":35,"quick_win":19.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":3481,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"642","title":"The analyze command should also work on a not-packed charm","author":"facundobatista","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/642","summary":"Feature request: `charmcraft analyze` should accept an unpacked charm directory (default `.`) in addition to a packed charm file. Labeled good first issue; a maintainer notes the fix is trivial but the work is blocked on #1042.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is triaged (labeled \"good first issue\", authored by maintainer facundobatista) and explicitly acknowledged by @lengau, who noted \"This should be pretty trivial now\" and pointed to the existing `lint_directory` service method. The latest comment (2025-09-17) states \"We're going to wait for #1042 on this,\" and #1042 is still open, so this is a valid, acknowledged feature blocked on an external dependency rather than stale or obsolete.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":26.25,"staleness":58,"complexity":25,"confidence":80,"support_request":10},"age_days":1684,"labels":["good first issue"],"created_at":"2022-02-01T15:37:53+00:00","updated_at":"2025-09-17T19:36:18+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":58,"complexity":25,"support_request":10,"confidence":80,"impact":35,"quick_win":26.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":22319,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"766","title":"The prime step uses the install dir when creating a list of migrateable filesets","author":"mr-cal","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/766","summary":"craft-parts prime step computes migratable filesets from the install dir instead of the stage dir, failing when stage removes a file prime includes. A one-line fix was proposed but breaks overlay cleaning tests; blocked on defining overlay cleaning semantics.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainers actively triaged this: @sergiusens confirmed the fileset should be built from staged content, and @mr-cal's 2025-06-23 comment shows the proposed fix breaks overlay-cleaning integration tests (test_lifecycle_overlay.py#L292) and the work is explicitly blocked on documenting overlay cleaning behavior. I verified the buggy line (part_install_dir in _builtin_prime) is still present at current HEAD, so the issue remains applicable and should stay open pending that architectural decision.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":14.0,"staleness":58,"complexity":72,"confidence":82,"support_request":0},"age_days":802,"labels":["Type: Bug"],"created_at":"2024-07-02T14:29:40+00:00","updated_at":"2025-06-23T13:51:49+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":58,"complexity":72,"support_request":0,"confidence":82,"impact":50,"quick_win":14.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":1661,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2477","title":"docs: add tutorial for testing a k8s charm","author":"sed-i","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/2477","summary":"Request for official tutorial on testing k8s charms with spread. Maintainer acknowledged as a 26.04 roadmap item (269 days ago). A test-kubernetes init profile exists (experimental) but no dedicated tutorial yet.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer @tonyandrewmeyer explicitly stated 'Charm Tech has this as a 26.04 roadmap item' (269 days ago), confirming it is triaged, valid, and planned. The test-kubernetes init profile (#2401) provides a partial framework but is marked experimental in the 4.0 release notes and does not constitute the requested tutorial. The issue remains relevant and scoped.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":24.75,"staleness":58,"complexity":45,"confidence":78,"support_request":30},"age_days":318,"labels":["Type: Documentation"],"created_at":"2025-10-30T08:35:05+00:00","updated_at":"2025-12-02T15:46:13+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":58,"complexity":45,"support_request":30,"confidence":78,"impact":45,"quick_win":24.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":21780,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1305","title":"`cabal` plugin","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/1305","summary":"Feature request to add a cabal plugin for building Haskell projects in craft-parts. Labeled Type: Enhancement; no cabal plugin exists in the codebase. A contributor volunteered in Jan 2026 but no maintainer response yet.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is a properly labelled (Type: Enhancement) feature request authored by a maintainer who explicitly welcomes PRs, and a contributor asked to take it on 234 days ago, showing continued interest. The cabal plugin is confirmed absent from craft_parts/plugins/ at HEAD, so the request remains valid and actionable; it should stay open pending a PR or maintainer assignment.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":22.0,"staleness":58,"complexity":45,"confidence":80,"support_request":10},"age_days":361,"labels":["Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2025-09-16T18:15:09+00:00","updated_at":"2026-01-09T20:23:10+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":58,"complexity":45,"support_request":10,"confidence":80,"impact":40,"quick_win":22.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":5179,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"496","title":"Add support for `org.opencontainers.image.revision` annotation","author":"carlcsaposs-canonical","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/496","summary":"Feature request to add org.opencontainers.image.revision annotation to rockcraft pack (git commit hash or explicit value) for source traceability. Maintainer triaged as valid but deferred pending the store/revision concept; not yet implemented.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer cjdcordeiro explicitly triaged this as a valid request but deferred it, stating 'Feel free to keep the issue open for revisiting in the future, but for now, I'm afraid there won't be any immediate action on this' pending the store/revision concept. The annotation is absent from rockcraft/models/project.py (only version/title/created/description/licenses/base.digest are set), and the feature is blocked on an architectural decision about what 'revision' means, so it remains a legitimate open feature request rather than stale or a support question.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":15.75,"staleness":58,"complexity":65,"confidence":80,"support_request":10},"age_days":926,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-02-29T13:31:19+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:12:48+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":58,"complexity":65,"support_request":10,"confidence":80,"impact":45,"quick_win":15.75,"has_related_links":false},{"id":13297,"project_name":"craft-cli","source":"github","external_id":"443","title":"fix(printer): ignore broken pipe on output streams","author":"gcomneno","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-cli/pull/443","summary":"Ignore BrokenPipeError in printer output streams to avoid crashes when piped to early-closing consumers (e.g., head -n1). +87/-11, 2 files, unit tests. All test jobs pass; lint/OSV failures pre-existing. No maintainer review; author pinged 99 days ago.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"The PR fixes open issue canonical/craft-cli#378 (BrokenPipeError when piping to head), which is still open and not addressed in main — grep confirms no BrokenPipeError handling exists in craft_cli/printer.py today. All test jobs pass and the author re-verified locally against current main 99 days ago, attributing the two failing checks (OSV-scanner on a generated requirements artifact, lint/files) to pre-existing diagnostics outside the diff. With 0 reviewers and the author explicitly asking whether to adjust or close, it needs a maintainer decision rather than closure.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":31.5,"staleness":58,"complexity":30,"confidence":80},"age_days":143,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-04-22T12:28:20+00:00","updated_at":"2026-05-24T14:35:35+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":58,"complexity":30,"support_request":null,"confidence":80,"impact":45,"quick_win":31.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":22252,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"833","title":"Allow plugins to add stage-packages.","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/833","summary":"Feature request to allow plugins to inject stage-packages/slices merged with user-provided ones, motivated by Rockcraft use case. No labels, no assignee, last activity ~18 months ago, feature not yet implemented in codebase.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"Filed by maintainer lengau as an enhancement but has no labels, no assignee, and only one comment (from vpa1977, 2024-08-29) suggesting a related but separate enhancement for custom package sources. Code inspection confirms no plugin mechanism for adding stage-packages exists (part_handler.py:1289 only reads self._part.spec.stage_packages). Needs labelling as enhancement and prioritisation.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":13.5,"staleness":58,"complexity":70,"confidence":72,"support_request":0},"age_days":744,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-08-29T21:45:06+00:00","updated_at":"2025-03-11T14:28:54+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":58,"complexity":70,"support_request":0,"confidence":72,"impact":45,"quick_win":13.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":4467,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"1208","title":"perf: lazy-load extension framework modules","author":"lczyk","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/pull/1208","summary":"Makes rockcraft's extensions package lazy-load its six framework modules instead of importing them eagerly at import time, to speed up CLI startup. CI fully green, zero maintainer review; target file still eagerly imports, so the change is still applicable.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"External contributor opened this 109 days ago with 0 comments and 0 reviewers, but all CI checks pass and I verified rockcraft/extensions/__init__.py still eagerly imports all six framework modules (django, expressjs, fastapi, flask, go, springboot) and registers them at import time, so the PR is not superseded. The repo remains active (recent commits like #1349, #1345, #1320), and the lazy-registration approach needs a maintainer to confirm it preserves get_extension_names()/registry behavior, so it warrants review rather than closure.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":19.25,"staleness":58,"complexity":45,"confidence":80},"age_days":121,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-05-14T10:57:04+00:00","updated_at":"2026-05-14T10:57:05+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":58,"complexity":45,"support_request":null,"confidence":80,"impact":35,"quick_win":19.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":3279,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"847","title":"Improve the 'release' response when resources are automatically released with the charm","author":"facundobatista","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/847","summary":"Request to enhance the 'charmcraft release' command output to list resources that Charmhub automatically attaches when a revision is released without explicit --resource flags. Store-side fix was released in 2022, but the client-side message enhancement remains unimplemented.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is a well-scoped, maintainer-authored feature request (labeled 'good first issue') to improve the release command's output message. The external dependency (Charmhub store bug 1987696) was resolved in October 2022, but the client-side enhancement in store.py still only mentions explicitly attached resources, not automatically released ones. The issue remains valid and actionable.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":14.0,"staleness":55,"complexity":30,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":1479,"labels":["good first issue"],"created_at":"2022-08-25T18:28:32+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:18:32+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":30,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":20,"quick_win":14.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":40450,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"6325","title":"Skip repacking if artifact contents are unchanged","author":"cmatsuoka","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/6325","summary":"Triaged feature request to implement ST160 conditional repacking API; feature appears implemented in craft-application and snapcraft but issue remains open.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Issue is triaged and describes a real feature need for Test Farm operation. Evidence shows conditional repacking was implemented in craft-application (PR #1111) and snapcraft (documented in 9.1 release notes with spread tests), but it's unclear whether this specific issue was resolved or if additional work remains. Without confirmation that the issue is fully addressed, keeping it open is safer than closing.","scores":{"impact":60,"quick_win":33.0,"staleness":55,"complexity":45,"confidence":50,"support_request":10},"age_days":68,"labels":["Status: Triaged"],"created_at":"2026-07-06T14:34:39+00:00","updated_at":"2026-07-06T14:45:45+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":45,"support_request":10,"confidence":50,"impact":60,"quick_win":33.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":39773,"project_name":"craft-providers","source":"github","external_id":"211","title":"multipass: better error handling when images are unavailable","author":"mr-cal","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-providers/issues/211","summary":"Enhancement to improve error handling and user guidance when Multipass snapcraft images are unavailable or unsupported on non-amd64 architectures. Currently open with maintainer discussion and downstream reports.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is a valid enhancement request initiated by a maintainer to improve error messaging for unavailable Multipass images, particularly on non-amd64 architectures. It has recent downstream references (snapcraft#5145) and active maintainer discussion, warranting its continued tracking despite moderate staleness.","scores":{"impact":60,"quick_win":42.0,"staleness":55,"complexity":30,"confidence":85,"support_request":10},"age_days":1313,"labels":["Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2023-02-07T21:24:17+00:00","updated_at":"2026-04-22T02:50:22+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":30,"support_request":10,"confidence":85,"impact":60,"quick_win":42.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":4765,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"910","title":"Rockcraft ignores configured staging Pro contract URL when building with `--pro=fips-updates`","author":"bschimke95","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/910","summary":"Rockcraft ignores the staging Pro contract URL from /etc/ubuntu-advantage/uaclient.conf when building with --pro=fips-updates, hitting production and failing with 401. Triaged by clay-lake, who has a fix ready in craft-providers and will trigger a new build once merged.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"A maintainer (clay-lake) actively triaged this and on 2025-07-14 stated 'I have a fix ready over at craft-providers... Once that is merged, I can trigger a new build and this issue should be resolved.' The fix corresponds to craft-providers PR #776 'fix(pro-sources): Inherit Host's contract_url', which directly addresses the reported behavior. The issue is a valid bug with a fix in flight, so it should stay open until the new rockcraft build ships.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"staleness":55,"complexity":40,"confidence":80,"support_request":5},"age_days":438,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-07-01T10:24:42+00:00","updated_at":"2025-07-14T14:51:03+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":40,"support_request":5,"confidence":80,"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":39168,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2720","title":"`organize` part expects distinct subdirectories since 4.2.1","author":"natalian98","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/2720","summary":"Regression in craft-parts where organizing multiple source patterns to the same destination directory now fails with FileOrganizeError since version 4.2.1","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"No maintainer has responded or labeled this issue in 88 days. The bug report is clear with reproduction steps and a workaround, but requires maintainer assessment to determine if the behavior change in craft-parts (commit 7fe7c84e 'make sure the destination does not exist before organizing') was intentional or a regression that needs fixing.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"staleness":55,"complexity":40,"confidence":60,"support_request":20},"age_days":97,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-06-08T09:55:58+00:00","updated_at":"2026-06-08T09:58:13+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":40,"support_request":20,"confidence":60,"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":6894,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"4984","title":"Renaming a file in a directory declared as a source for a part doesn't trigger a new pull","author":"dilyn-corner","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/4984","summary":"Enhancement: renaming or modifying a file in a local directory source (source: src/) doesn't retrigger the pull step, so snaps can silently miss files or fail later steps. Triaged and acknowledged; fix tracked upstream in craft-parts#817, still open.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer mr-cal acknowledged it as a useful enhancement and filed the upstream bug craft-parts#817, and a user confirmed in 2026-02-18 that the bug still reproduces (even tarball content changes don't retrigger pull). The issue is triaged, valid, and blocked on an external dependency (craft-parts), so it should stay open rather than be closed as stale.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":15.0,"staleness":55,"complexity":70,"confidence":80,"support_request":10},"age_days":755,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2024-08-18T23:21:29+00:00","updated_at":"2026-02-18T14:43:10+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":70,"support_request":10,"confidence":80,"impact":50,"quick_win":15.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":6889,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"4989","title":"Document post-prime and pack steps","author":"mr-cal","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/4989","summary":"Documentation request to explain post-prime and pack lifecycle steps (metadata generation, asset copying) in the parts lifecycle doc. Triaged by maintainer, linked to internal ticket CRAFT-3266, but no doc update has landed yet.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is triaged (Status: Triaged, Type: Documentation labels, maintainer-authored, linked to Jira CRAFT-3266) and the documentation gap persists: docs/explanation/parts-lifecycle.rst still describes only the five core steps (Pull, Build, Stage, Prime, Pack) without covering post-prime metadata generation, asset copying, or ELF patching. Inactivity for ~16 months doesn't make it irrelevant since the doc hasn't been updated.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":22.75,"staleness":55,"complexity":35,"confidence":78,"support_request":5},"age_days":754,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Documentation"],"created_at":"2024-08-19T14:41:16+00:00","updated_at":"2025-04-25T20:33:52+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":35,"support_request":5,"confidence":78,"impact":35,"quick_win":22.75,"has_related_links":false},{"id":13708,"project_name":"craft-cli","source":"github","external_id":"31","title":"Error message formatting","author":"cmatsuoka","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-cli/issues/31","summary":"Feature request to let the emitter error() method format error messages (e.g. add an 'Error: ' prefix) and optionally output them in red, respecting no-color.org. Open, unlabelled, with one maintainer comment endorsing the idea; no implementation yet.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no assignee, and only a single maintainer comment (jugmac00, 2022-03-04) endorsing the idea and adding a colored-output suggestion with a no-color.org link; there is no evidence it was categorised, prioritised, or implemented. The current emitter error() in craft_cli/messages.py takes a CraftError and formats fixed sections (details, resolution, doc URL) with no user-configurable prefix or color, so the request is still applicable but untriaged.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":17.5,"staleness":55,"complexity":30,"confidence":60,"support_request":10},"age_days":1768,"labels":[],"created_at":"2021-11-09T15:11:13+00:00","updated_at":"2025-03-10T18:59:13+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":30,"support_request":10,"confidence":60,"impact":25,"quick_win":17.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":13143,"project_name":"craft-archives","source":"github","external_id":"151","title":"Update sources added by craft-archives","author":"mr-cal","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-archives/issues/151","summary":"Enhancement to set architectures on craft-*.sources files (not just ubuntu.sources) for cross-compilation support. Triaged by maintainer, assigned to tigarmo, internal ticket CRAFT-4112 created.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is triaged (Status: Triaged label), the maintainer explicitly assigned it to @tigarmo as a follow-up task, and an internal Jira ticket (CRAFT-4112) was created. The codebase now has foreign architecture support (commit 64f1092, changelog 2.1.0) but the PPA/UCA install paths still don't pass architectures, so the gap likely persists. No evidence of completion or obsolescence.","scores":{"impact":55,"quick_win":27.5,"staleness":55,"complexity":50,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":585,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2025-02-04T17:17:38+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-14T01:31:28+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":50,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":55,"quick_win":27.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":5760,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"6161","title":"Support chart colours aren't dark-mode friendly","author":"medubelko","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/6161","summary":"Support-schedule chart in snapcraft docs renders release milestones and legacy add-on commitment in near-black (#111), unreadable in dark mode. Fix requested: Canonical colours with contrast for both modes. Unfixed; black fill still in support-chart.css, no activity since filing.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is a valid, clearly-scoped bug (labeled Type: Bug, filed by maintainer medubelko) and is still reproducible: docs/_static/css/support-chart.css still defines .chart__bar--black { fill: #111; } and .chart__milestone-release { fill: #56334b; }, and the only commits touching the chart files are the original addition (#5911) and a label/date update (#6158), neither of which addresses dark-mode contrast. It should remain open for a straightforward CSS colour fix.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":16.0,"staleness":55,"complexity":20,"confidence":80,"support_request":0},"age_days":158,"labels":["Type: Bug"],"created_at":"2026-04-07T23:37:19+00:00","updated_at":"2026-04-10T13:27:08+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":20,"support_request":0,"confidence":80,"impact":20,"quick_win":16.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":12041,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"1033","title":"`test` command provides unhelpful output or failure","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/issues/1033","summary":"test command in brief mode only says 'Testing failed.' on failure. Triaged by maintainer with Jira ticket CRAFT-5058, but no fix committed after 167 days. Code at testing.py:331 still raises bare CraftError('Testing failed.').","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Issue is triaged (labeled Status: Triaged, Type: Bug), created by maintainer lengau, and has a Jira ticket (CRAFT-5058). Code inspection confirms the bug persists: testing.py:331 still raises CraftError('Testing failed.') with no failure details. No fix has been committed in the 167 days since filing, but the issue remains valid and relevant.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":22.0,"staleness":55,"complexity":45,"confidence":72,"support_request":5},"age_days":179,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Bug"],"created_at":"2026-03-17T22:08:36+00:00","updated_at":"2026-03-17T22:08:54+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":45,"support_request":5,"confidence":72,"impact":40,"quick_win":22.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":1537,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2605","title":"Re-enable MacOS tests","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/2605","summary":"Task to re-enable disabled macOS CI tests, blocked by a libgit2 version removed from Homebrew. Created by maintainer lengau as follow-up to PR #2606 which disabled the tests. Still open, unlabelled, no activity in 155 days; tests remain commented out in workflows.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is still valid — macOS tests remain commented out in tests.yaml and qa.yaml with explicit references to #2605. The author is a maintainer (lengau), indicating buy-in, and the task is clearly scoped. However, it requires external coordination with Homebrew charmcraft maintainers to resolve the libgit2 dependency, which may be why it has sat for 155 days without progress.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":24.75,"staleness":55,"complexity":45,"confidence":75,"support_request":5},"age_days":170,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-03-26T16:12:08+00:00","updated_at":"2026-03-26T16:12:08+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":45,"support_request":5,"confidence":75,"impact":45,"quick_win":24.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":22110,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"975","title":"Add CLI option to select the target architecture","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/975","summary":"Feature request to add a CLI option (e.g. --target-arch) to python -m craft_parts for selecting the target architecture, useful for demonstrating cross-compilation bugs like #974. Triaged by a maintainer, synced to Jira (CRAFT-4734), not yet implemented.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is labelled 'Status: Triaged' and 'Type: Enhancement' and was filed by a maintainer (lengau), with a Jira ticket (CRAFT-4734) created in Sep 2025, so it has been assessed and acknowledged. I verified craft_parts/main.py still has no target-arch option in _parse_arguments(), and LifecycleManager/ProjectInfo already carry target_arch (infos.py, lifecycle_manager.py), so the feature remains unimplemented and feasible. Last activity was ~12 months ago with no maintainer request for more info, so it should stay open rather than be closed as stale.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":22.0,"staleness":55,"complexity":45,"confidence":80,"support_request":0},"age_days":605,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2025-01-15T18:30:34+00:00","updated_at":"2025-09-03T20:42:15+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":45,"support_request":0,"confidence":80,"impact":40,"quick_win":22.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":12052,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"1022","title":"docs: detail SPDX compatibility for `license` key","author":"medubelko","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/issues/1022","summary":"Documentation improvement for the `license` key to clarify it accepts SPDX expressions, mention AND/OR support, provide richer examples, and link to the full SPDX spec. Partially addressed: docstring now says 'SPDX expression' and links to spec, but AND/OR mention and richer examples are still missing.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is triaged (labeled 'Status: Triaged', 'Type: Documentation') and partially addressed by commit c810a9ee which added the 'SPDX expression' wording and spec link to the docstring. However, the remaining requests—explicitly stating AND/OR are supported and providing richer conjunctive examples—are still unaddressed in the current code, so the issue should remain open for completion.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":29.75,"staleness":55,"complexity":15,"confidence":75,"support_request":10},"age_days":187,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Documentation"],"created_at":"2026-03-09T20:33:52+00:00","updated_at":"2026-03-12T16:48:29+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":15,"support_request":10,"confidence":75,"impact":35,"quick_win":29.75,"has_related_links":false},{"id":40255,"project_name":"imagecraft","source":"github","external_id":"372","title":"Improve support for preseeding in managed builds","author":"jahn-junior","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/imagecraft/issues/372","summary":"Feature request to improve preseeding workflow in managed builds, specifically around signing key automation and eliminating interactive GPG prompts. Triaged but inactive for 64 days.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has the 'Status: Triaged' label indicating maintainer acknowledgment, and it represents a legitimate feature request to improve the signing key workflow for managed builds. While inactive for 64 days, the snap-preseed plugin (PR #333) was recently added but the issue specifically concerns the signing key automation gap in managed/Multipass builds, which may not be fully addressed by that plugin alone.","scores":{"impact":65,"quick_win":35.75,"staleness":55,"complexity":45,"confidence":70,"support_request":25},"age_days":72,"labels":["Status: Triaged"],"created_at":"2026-07-02T22:34:59+00:00","updated_at":"2026-07-03T00:51:06+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":45,"support_request":25,"confidence":70,"impact":65,"quick_win":35.75,"has_related_links":false},{"id":6876,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"5003","title":"Building snap with `core20` failed with non-informative error message","author":"chanchiwai-ray","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/5003","summary":"snapcraft pack with core20 base gives non-informative 'Missing argument DIRECTORY' error. Maintainer confirmed fix via #5425/#5426; current code shows directory arg is now optional (nargs='?') and pack runs lifecycle when omitted.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer explicitly acknowledged the issue on 2025-04-28 and referenced PRs #5425 and #5426 as the fix path. The current codebase already shows the directory argument as optional (nargs='?') in PackCommand, suggesting the fix has been implemented. However, the issue is still open and the referenced PRs are closed, so it should be verified whether the fix is fully merged and released before closing.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":28.0,"staleness":55,"complexity":30,"confidence":85,"support_request":10},"age_days":747,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2024-08-27T04:30:33+00:00","updated_at":"2025-04-28T14:31:58+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":30,"support_request":10,"confidence":85,"impact":40,"quick_win":28.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":13402,"project_name":"craft-cli","source":"github","external_id":"338","title":"logger pollutes strings with white spaces","author":"dariuszd21","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-cli/pull/338","summary":"Fixes broken output when streaming_brief=True and log entries contain whitespace (\\n, \\t). Small 1-file fix (+22/-1). Pending review, CI failing on linters and ubuntu-20.04, codecov 399 commits behind main.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"The PR targets a still-present feature (streaming_brief in craft_cli/messages.py) but has 0 reviewers, failing linter and ubuntu-20.04 CI checks, and the codecov report is 399 commits behind main. The author is a maintainer (dariuszd21) who should address the lint failures and rebase before a maintainer can review.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":29.75,"staleness":55,"complexity":15,"confidence":75},"age_days":501,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-04-29T10:05:25+00:00","updated_at":"2026-04-06T03:35:44+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":15,"support_request":null,"confidence":75,"impact":35,"quick_win":29.75,"has_related_links":false},{"id":41834,"project_name":"imagecraft","source":"github","external_id":"380","title":"[Feature] Support ppc64el bootloader installation via Open Firmware (powerpc-ieee1275) and PReP partitions","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/imagecraft/issues/380","summary":"Feature request to add ppc64el bootloader support via Open Firmware and PReP partitions; no maintainer response or labels after 46 days","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no maintainer response, no assignee, and zero comments after 46 days. It is a feature request requiring architectural decisions about bootloader support for ppc64el systems. The lack of maintainer engagement indicates it needs triage to determine if this is a priority and whether the proposed approach aligns with the project's roadmap.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":22.5,"staleness":55,"complexity":50,"confidence":55,"support_request":15},"age_days":53,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-07-21T15:45:27+00:00","updated_at":"2026-07-21T15:45:27+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":50,"support_request":15,"confidence":55,"impact":45,"quick_win":22.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":2562,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"1566","title":"CI: remote build tests time out when the build queue is busy","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/1566","summary":"CI remote build tests time out when Launchpad's build queue is busy. Three fixes requested: limit to amd64, extend build time, move to weekly scheduled test. Two of three are done in the repo (amd64 limit in #1573, weekly move in #1632); only the build-time extension remains unverified.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is a legitimate CI-reliability bug, not a support request, and two of its three requested fixes are already merged: #1573 limits the remote-build smoke test to a single arch (amd64) and #1632 moves the remote-build tests to a scheduled weekly job (spread-manual.yaml now runs on a Wed/Sun cron and only on PRs touching the workflow or remote-build paths). The current task.yaml still shows kill-timeout: 30m, so the 'extend the build time' item is not clearly resolved, and the issue has no labels or maintainer acknowledgement beyond the Jira-sync bot, so it should stay open for triage/verification rather than be closed.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":21.0,"staleness":55,"complexity":30,"confidence":70,"support_request":0},"age_days":926,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-02-29T21:23:26+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:18:15+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":30,"support_request":0,"confidence":70,"impact":30,"quick_win":21.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":22338,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"747","title":"Python plugin. `pip install .` failing because of `pyproject.toml` file","author":"javierdelapuente","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/747","summary":"Python plugin runs `pip install .` when pyproject.toml exists, failing for projects using it only for tool config. Issue is 823 days old with recent suggestion for heuristic fix.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue lacks labels, assignee, and explicit maintainer acknowledgment despite being 823 days old. A recent comment from cmatsuoka suggests a heuristic approach (checking for [project] or [build-system] sections in pyproject.toml), but no maintainer has committed to addressing it or prioritized the fix.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":24.75,"staleness":55,"complexity":45,"confidence":70,"support_request":15},"age_days":830,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-06-04T13:25:31+00:00","updated_at":"2026-09-05T00:14:12+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":45,"support_request":15,"confidence":70,"impact":45,"quick_win":24.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":1564,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2578","title":"docs: The usage parameters show up as None","author":"famulu","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/2578","summary":"charmcraft release docs show usage parameters as <None> <None> <None> instead of channel, name, revision; triaged with Jira ticket CHARMCRAFT-686, no fix yet","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is a valid documentation bug (auto-generated usage line renders <None> placeholders) and has been triaged (Status: Triaged, Type: Documentation) with an internal ticket CHARMCRAFT-686 created, but no fix or PR is referenced. The current ReleaseCommand in store.py still uses positional/option arguments that could produce such a usage string, so the problem likely persists.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":15.0,"staleness":55,"complexity":25,"confidence":60,"support_request":0},"age_days":205,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Documentation"],"created_at":"2026-02-20T04:02:30+00:00","updated_at":"2026-02-20T22:00:08+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":25,"support_request":0,"confidence":60,"impact":20,"quick_win":15.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":6850,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"5029","title":"Docs: CI patterns for organic and external snaps","author":"medubelko","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/5029","summary":"Documentation gap for CI patterns (organic and external snaps) identified from a forum contribution. Triaged by maintainer, Jira ticket SNAPCRAFT-1117 created April 2025. No evidence the docs have been added to the repo yet.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is triaged (Status: Triaged, Type: Documentation labels) and has a Jira ticket (SNAPCRAFT-1117) created in April 2025. Repo search confirms no CI patterns documentation has been added yet (no matches for 'CI patterns', 'fire-and-forget', or 'version bump' in docs/). The documentation gap remains relevant to snap publishing workflows.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":27.0,"staleness":55,"complexity":40,"confidence":75,"support_request":10},"age_days":731,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Documentation"],"created_at":"2024-09-11T19:03:08+00:00","updated_at":"2025-04-28T13:57:45+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":75,"impact":45,"quick_win":27.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":6819,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"5060","title":"Provide `status` output as a machine-readable format","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/5060","summary":"Enhancement request for machine-readable (JSON) output from the `status` command. Triaged and explicitly blocked by craft-cli#278 (output format support), which remains open. Last activity 494 days ago.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is triaged (labeled 'Status: Triaged') and explicitly blocked by canonical/craft-cli#278 per mr-cal's 2025-04-24 comment. That blocking issue is still open, so this remains a valid, scoped enhancement waiting on an external dependency. Other snapcraft commands (metrics, names, validation-sets) already support --format, confirming the pattern is established.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":22.0,"staleness":55,"complexity":45,"confidence":82,"support_request":10},"age_days":719,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2024-09-23T20:32:04+00:00","updated_at":"2025-04-24T16:14:02+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":45,"support_request":10,"confidence":82,"impact":40,"quick_win":22.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":21756,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1329","title":"Investigate error conditions of fuse-overlayfs","author":"bepri","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/1329","summary":"Investigate whether fuse-overlayfs .wh..opq files still cause errors during whiteout cleaning in craft-parts, spawned by a XXX comment in part_handler.py. Triaged, no maintainer response yet; the referenced XXX comment no longer appears in current code.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is labeled Status: Triaged and was created by a maintainer (bepri) as a follow-up investigation task. The referenced XXX comment at part_handler.py:1029 no longer appears in the current codebase (grep for XXX only finds matches in yum.py), suggesting the code may have been refactored since. However, no maintainer has commented on whether the investigation is complete or the code cleanup is done, so it should remain open pending confirmation.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":55,"complexity":40,"confidence":60,"support_request":0},"age_days":354,"labels":["Status: Triaged"],"created_at":"2025-09-23T16:04:45+00:00","updated_at":"2025-09-23T16:05:12+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":40,"support_request":0,"confidence":60,"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":11910,"project_name":"debcraft","source":"github","external_id":"89","title":"Debcraft snap FTBFS on risc-v due to missing rustc","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/debcraft/issues/89","summary":"Debcraft snap FTBFS on riscv64: pydantic-core lacks a riscv64 wheel, forcing a source build that needs rustc. Triaged as a bug; fix expected once pydantic ships riscv64 wheels (pydantic/pydantic#12723). Lock file still pins pydantic 2.11.9.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is labelled Status: Triaged / Type: Bug and has a clear root cause: pydantic-core has no riscv64 wheel, so the build falls back to a rustc source build that fails. The last comment (166 days ago) points to pydantic PR #12723 adding riscv64 wheels in the next release, making this blocked on an external dependency rather than stale or unactionable; uv.lock still pins pydantic 2.11.9, so nothing has been fixed in-repo yet.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":29.25,"staleness":55,"complexity":35,"confidence":78,"support_request":5},"age_days":204,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Bug"],"created_at":"2026-02-20T14:54:56+00:00","updated_at":"2026-03-18T23:44:19+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":35,"support_request":5,"confidence":78,"impact":45,"quick_win":29.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":3413,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"710","title":"`charmcraft pack` retains no longer existing files from previous packs","author":"sed-i","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/710","summary":"charmcraft pack includes files deleted from the working directory in the charm archive; clean fixes it. Triaged as a known bug, re-confirmed present in Oct 2024, upstream craft-parts bug filed, per-part clean workaround documented.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is triaged (Status: Triaged, Type: Bug), explicitly confirmed as a known bug by maintainer facundobatista, and re-confirmed still present in Oct 2024 by lengau with an upstream report at canonical/craft-parts#851, which I verified is still open with a failing test awaiting implementation. The bug remains reproducible and relevant, so it should stay open until the craft-parts fix lands; the documented `charmcraft clean <part-name>` workaround mitigates but does not resolve it.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":24.75,"staleness":55,"complexity":45,"confidence":82,"support_request":5},"age_days":1647,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Bug"],"created_at":"2022-03-11T05:37:00+00:00","updated_at":"2025-09-17T21:14:10+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":45,"support_request":5,"confidence":82,"impact":45,"quick_win":24.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":5085,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"590","title":"Improve the LXD init experience","author":"sergiusens","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/590","summary":"LXD init check for rockcraft pack is implemented in craft-providers. Maintainer kept issue open for two follow-ups: handling broken LXD profiles from older versions (PR #588 closed unmerged) and multi-profile selection. Inactive ~12.5 months.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer cjdcordeiro explicitly triaged and acknowledged the issue ('This is already in, but we can consider keeping this issue open for a bit longer'), identifying two valid follow-ups. The core LXD init check is confirmed in craft-providers code (is_initialized in installer.py, commit eda59e9). PR #588 to handle broken profiles was closed without merging, so that corner case remains unaddressed. The issue is triaged and still relevant, though low priority.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":15.0,"staleness":55,"complexity":40,"confidence":75,"support_request":10},"age_days":815,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-06-19T19:01:15+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:12:52+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":75,"impact":25,"quick_win":15.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":4572,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"1103","title":"fix: remove snapcraft.yaml reference from expand-extensions","author":"gcomneno","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/pull/1103","summary":"Removes snapcraft.yaml references from expand-extensions help text and docstring (3 lines, 1 file). Approved with CI green, but inactive ~6 months; fix still unapplied in codebase; likely duplicate of older PR #885.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"The PR is approved with all CI checks passing, and I verified the target strings (lines 85 and 88 of rockcraft/commands/extensions.py) still exist at HEAD, so the fix remains applicable and ready to land. However, the PR body says 'Fixes #885' while #885 is itself an approved PR making the identical change, so a maintainer should decide whether to land this one or the older #885 rather than auto-merging.","scores":{"impact":10,"quick_win":9.5,"staleness":55,"complexity":5,"confidence":80},"age_days":202,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-02-22T16:50:50+00:00","updated_at":"2026-03-07T19:13:54+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":5,"support_request":null,"confidence":80,"impact":10,"quick_win":9.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":12063,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"1011","title":"feat: strict platform name validation","author":"lengau","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/pull/1011","summary":"Adds strict platform name validation via craft-platforms validator, skipping legacy bases (ubuntu 20.04-24.04). 216/13 lines across 10 files. Pending review, 1 unresolved comment, 4 failing CI jobs (fast tests, min deps, lint).","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"The PR has 1 unresolved review comment and 4 failing CI jobs (fast tests on ubuntu-22.04/24.04, minimum dependencies, lint/files), indicating it needs maintainer attention before it can be merged. The author is a maintainer and the feature aligns with the project's existing platform validation work (reserved names #936, slash ban #947), but the failing CI and unresolved comment mean it is not ready to land.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":27.5,"staleness":55,"complexity":45,"confidence":60},"age_days":214,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-02-10T21:54:18+00:00","updated_at":"2026-03-05T18:59:02+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":45,"support_request":null,"confidence":60,"impact":50,"quick_win":27.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":21752,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1333","title":"Consolidate `os-release` utils with other repositories","author":"bepri","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/1333","summary":"Consolidate os-release parsing in Craft Parts with Craft Providers/Charmcraft. Triaged; maintainers agreed to switch to the `distro` library. No PR yet; OsRelease class still present in codebase.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer bepri explicitly agreed on 2025-09-23 to switch to the `distro` library, and the OsRelease class is still present in craft_parts/utils/os_utils.py (line 290) with no PR yet addressing the consolidation. The issue is triaged, scoped, and awaiting implementation.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":55,"complexity":40,"confidence":72,"support_request":0},"age_days":354,"labels":["Status: Triaged"],"created_at":"2025-09-23T18:00:23+00:00","updated_at":"2025-09-23T18:35:59+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":40,"support_request":0,"confidence":72,"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":21623,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1466","title":"feat: Comment out replace statements to relative paths in go.mod","author":"atandrewlee","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/pull/1466","summary":"Adds go-use plugin logic to strip relative-path replace statements from go.mod, with integration tests. Changes requested; maintainer notes *-use plugins are obsolete post-Madrid, deferring to tigarmo on whether to adapt to the newer Go plugin.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer @steinbro (2026-08-10) states the *-use plugins are 'effectively obsolete post-Madrid' and defers to @tigarmo on whether to adapt the fix into the newer Go plugin, leaving the decision open. The author's last activity (2026-03-27) was a review request, and the PR has 2 unresolved review comments plus failing architecture-specific CI, so it is not ready to land but is not clearly irrelevant either.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":19.25,"staleness":55,"complexity":45,"confidence":70},"age_days":204,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-02-20T19:23:46+00:00","updated_at":"2026-08-10T15:25:20+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":45,"support_request":null,"confidence":70,"impact":35,"quick_win":19.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":5048,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"627","title":"Insufficient documentation on how to build Rockcraft's documentation","author":"hd9","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/627","summary":"Docs gap: building Rockcraft's docs locally wasn't documented (make installdocs failed on fresh env). The build-docs how-to page now documents the current setup-docs/docs workflow, so the core request appears addressed; a contributor recently asked to be assigned.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The reported `make installdocs` failure is obsolete: the docs Makefile was refactored (starter pack refresh #1112, sphinx stack 2.0 #1252) and the build-docs how-to page now documents `make setup-docs` / `make docs` / `make docs-auto` with a spread test (docs/how-to/code/build-docs/task.yaml) verifying a clean-tree build. However, the issue is unlabelled, the reporter's extra ask (a PR-contributing section) is unaddressed, and @gcomneno asked to be assigned 167 days ago with no maintainer response, so it still needs triage/acknowledgement rather than closure.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":24.0,"staleness":55,"complexity":20,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":800,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-07-05T01:14:47+00:00","updated_at":"2026-03-17T16:15:31+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":20,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":30,"quick_win":24.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":6278,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"5602","title":"Enable fedora system","author":"cmatsuoka","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/5602","summary":"Feature request to let snapcraft test run against a Fedora LXD image so snaps can be tested on non-Ubuntu systems. Triaged by a maintainer and synced to internal ticket SNAPCRAFT-1175; no implementation or further discussion yet.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is a legitimate feature request (not a bug or support question) that has been triaged by maintainer cmatsuoka and synced to internal ticket SNAPCRAFT-1175, so it should remain open. The snapcraft test command exists and is actively developed (e.g. commit 9d40c0174 'fix(test): enable test to run on platforms other than 24.04'), but no code or PR yet enables a Fedora LXD image, so it is not fixed or stale.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":22.0,"staleness":55,"complexity":45,"confidence":70,"support_request":0},"age_days":435,"labels":["Status: Triaged"],"created_at":"2025-07-04T17:28:52+00:00","updated_at":"2025-07-04T17:29:13+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":45,"support_request":0,"confidence":70,"impact":40,"quick_win":22.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":2062,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2067","title":"Action parameters and config options represent integers in two different ways (`int` vs `integer`) in charmcraft.yaml","author":"gruyaume","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/2067","summary":"charmcraft.yaml uses 'int' for config options but 'integer' for action params. Maintainer confirmed this mirrors Juju's config.yaml/actions.yaml and reported the change to Juju (juju/juju#19979). Blocked on Juju accepting 'integer' in config.yaml.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer @lengau acknowledged the issue on 2025-06-13, explaining the values are tied to Juju's config.yaml and actions.yaml formats, and filed juju/juju#19979 requesting Juju accept 'integer' in config.yaml. The issue is triaged, valid, and explicitly blocked on an external dependency (Juju), so it should remain open until that upstream change lands.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":13.75,"staleness":55,"complexity":45,"confidence":82,"support_request":10},"age_days":613,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-01-07T17:27:47+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:17:36+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":45,"support_request":10,"confidence":82,"impact":25,"quick_win":13.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":21917,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1175","title":"FileSourceHandler is slow for large sources","author":"enriqueesanchz","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/1175","summary":"FileSourceHandler download/extraction is CPU-bound and slow on resource-constrained hardware (riscv64). Triaged as enhancement with Jira ticket CRAFT-4689. Discussion identified multi-threaded decompression and piped download as solutions. No fix committed; code still uses requests.get with 1-hour timeout and single-threaded tarfile.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Issue is triaged (Status: Triaged, Type: Enhancement labels), has an internal Jira ticket (CRAFT-4689), and substantive maintainer discussion identified concrete optimization paths (multi-threaded xz, piped download, separate threads). The underlying code in craft_parts/sources/base.py still uses requests.get with timeout=3600 and iter_content(1024), and url_utils.download_request still writes to disk before extraction, confirming the problem persists. Last activity was 383 days ago but the issue remains relevant and scoped.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":20.25,"staleness":55,"complexity":55,"confidence":78,"support_request":5},"age_days":428,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2025-07-11T16:09:32+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-13T16:17:01+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":55,"support_request":5,"confidence":78,"impact":45,"quick_win":20.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":2585,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"1543","title":"`--force` Considered Harmful™","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/1543","summary":"Feature request to replace the ambiguous --force CLI option in charmcraft commands (pack, init, analyse) with descriptive parameters like --override-linters, suppress it from help, and warn on use. Still unimplemented in current code; no labels, no assignee, awaiting maintainer decision on CLI guidelines.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no assignee, and the only maintainer activity is a question to @sergiusens about CLI guidelines (2024-02-22) that went unanswered, so it has not been triaged or prioritized. The requested change is still unimplemented: --force remains in pack (lifecycle.py), init, and analyse, and no --override-linters or deprecation warning exists in the codebase. It is a valid, well-scoped enhancement that needs a maintainer to decide on naming conventions before work can proceed.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":55,"complexity":40,"confidence":75,"support_request":5},"age_days":933,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-02-22T14:47:05+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:18:10+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":40,"support_request":5,"confidence":75,"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":41573,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"2161191","title":"python plugin messing with snapcraft env","author":"~t-a-k","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2161191","summary":"Python plugin leaking snapcraft's site-packages into builds, causing environment pollution. This issue appears to describe the same problem fixed in snapcraft#2901.","suggested_action":"close_not_a_bug","suggested_action_reason":"The reported issue describes the same problem as snapcraft#2901, which was merged and fixed the site-packages leak by conditionally exporting $SNAP/site-packages only when SNAPCRAFT_INTERPRETER is set. Since the underlying bug has already been resolved, this issue should be closed as a duplicate.","scores":{"impact":55,"quick_win":41.25,"staleness":55,"complexity":25,"confidence":85,"support_request":15},"age_days":56,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-07-18T12:36:52.832100+00:00","updated_at":"2026-07-18T12:36:52.832100+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":25,"support_request":15,"confidence":85,"impact":55,"quick_win":41.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":39478,"project_name":"craft-providers","source":"github","external_id":"970","title":"Test on Python 3.14 and Ubuntu 26.04 (Resolute)","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-providers/issues/970","summary":"Feature request to add Python 3.14 and Ubuntu 26.04 to CI matrix. Unlabelled, no maintainer response after 93 days.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no assignee, and zero maintainer comments after 93 days. Current CI (qa.yaml) tests Python 3.10/3.12/3.13 on Ubuntu 22.04/24.04, confirming Python 3.14 and Ubuntu 26.04 are not yet included. A maintainer needs to assess priority and feasibility before deciding whether to implement or close.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":32.0,"staleness":55,"complexity":20,"confidence":60,"support_request":0},"age_days":101,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-06-03T15:47:24+00:00","updated_at":"2026-06-03T15:47:24+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":20,"support_request":0,"confidence":60,"impact":40,"quick_win":32.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":15713,"project_name":"starbase","source":"github","external_id":"532","title":"docs: app title isn't read in TOC","author":"medubelko","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/starbase/issues/532","summary":"Rockcraft docs TOC title falls back to 'dev' instead of the Git tag because the RTD runner can't resolve the package version. Filed by a maintainer with no comments; related version/title fixes (#588, #590) landed since.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"No maintainer has commented, labelled, or assigned this issue (0 comments, 115 days old), so it lacks triage. The version lines in docs/conf.py are still commented out, but commits #588 ('fix version in title') and #590 ('remove html_title') suggest the title/version handling was reworked, so it needs a maintainer to confirm whether the RTD version-resolution problem is still reproducible before closing or keeping open.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":16.5,"staleness":55,"complexity":45,"confidence":55,"support_request":10},"age_days":127,"labels":["Type: Documentation","Type: Bug"],"created_at":"2026-05-08T18:00:26+00:00","updated_at":"2026-05-08T18:09:03+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":45,"support_request":10,"confidence":55,"impact":30,"quick_win":16.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":6268,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"5613","title":"Poor error reporting for bases earlier than 24","author":"dilyn-corner","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/5613","summary":"Snapcraft 8.x crashes with a raw traceback (TypeError: 'NoneType' object is not iterable) instead of a friendly error when an empty/None grammar field (e.g. build-packages:) is used on core22 and earlier bases; core24 reports a proper error. Triaged as an enhancement, internal ticket SNAPCRAFT-1186 created, no fix yet.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"A maintainer (@mr-cal) explicitly triaged this as a real UX bug ('this is not a good user experience... Snapcraft should be more robust when processing grammar') and it was synced to internal ticket SNAPCRAFT-1186, so it is acknowledged and valid. The root cause is still present in the code: snapcraft/parts/grammar.py passes unprocessed_grammar (which is None for an empty key) straight into craft_grammar's GrammarProcessor.process, which does `for section in grammar` and raises TypeError. It is not stale-irrelevant since core22 is still supported and the code path is unchanged.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":27.0,"staleness":55,"complexity":40,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":425,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2025-07-14T19:11:32+00:00","updated_at":"2025-07-21T13:42:21+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":45,"quick_win":27.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":13683,"project_name":"craft-cli","source":"github","external_id":"56","title":"Simplify the Dispatcher usage","author":"facundobatista","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-cli/issues/56","summary":"Refactor request to simplify craft-cli Dispatcher usage by adding a simple_run helper or implicit pre_parse_args/load_command calls before run. Triaged by maintainer, synced to internal ticket CRAFT-4790, but no code change implemented yet.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is labelled Status: Triaged and Type: Refactor, and a maintainer (facundobatista) authored it with a concrete design proposal. The only recent activity is the 2025-09-17 bot comment creating internal ticket CRAFT-4790, indicating it is still tracked. The three-step flow (pre_parse_args, load_command, run) still exists in craft_cli/dispatcher.py, so the request remains applicable.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":15.75,"staleness":55,"complexity":55,"confidence":70,"support_request":5},"age_days":1691,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Refactor"],"created_at":"2022-01-25T18:52:27+00:00","updated_at":"2025-09-17T21:06:52+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":55,"support_request":5,"confidence":70,"impact":35,"quick_win":15.75,"has_related_links":false},{"id":41575,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"2161202","title":"rust plugin not working on core24","author":"~t-a-k","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2161202","summary":"Rust plugin fails on core24 base snaps with 'rustup not found' error. Untriaged, no maintainer response after 49 days.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no maintainer comments, and zero engagement after 49 days. The craft-parts rust_plugin.py code confirms the validation logic checks for rustup availability, and core24 apparently doesn't include it by default unlike core26. This needs maintainer assessment to determine if it's a regression, documentation gap, or requires code changes.","scores":{"impact":75,"quick_win":41.25,"staleness":55,"complexity":45,"confidence":75,"support_request":15},"age_days":56,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-07-18T14:57:34.267742+00:00","updated_at":"2026-07-18T14:57:34.267742+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":45,"support_request":15,"confidence":75,"impact":75,"quick_win":41.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":13073,"project_name":"craft-archives","source":"github","external_id":"221","title":"Support adding private repositories","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-archives/issues/221","summary":"Enhancement to support adding private apt repositories with authentication via /etc/apt/auth.conf.d, including private PPAs. Triaged by maintainer, Jira ticket CRAFT-5074 created, no implementation work started.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is labeled 'Status: Triaged' and 'Type: Enhancement', was authored by maintainer lengau, and has a linked Jira ticket (CRAFT-5074). No code changes related to auth.conf.d or private repository authentication exist in the codebase, confirming this is an unimplemented feature. It remains a valid, scoped enhancement for imagecraft's private repo support.","scores":{"impact":55,"quick_win":24.75,"staleness":55,"complexity":55,"confidence":78,"support_request":5},"age_days":169,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2026-03-27T22:44:38+00:00","updated_at":"2026-03-27T22:45:00+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":55,"support_request":5,"confidence":78,"impact":55,"quick_win":24.75,"has_related_links":false},{"id":13118,"project_name":"craft-archives","source":"github","external_id":"176","title":"Allow modifying existing default repositories","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-archives/issues/176","summary":"Enhancement request (triaged, Jira CRAFT-4634) for a function like install_in_root that rewrites existing sources.list/ubuntu.sources to change default repo URLs, e.g. to old-releases.ubuntu.com for EOL releases. Appears implemented in craft-archives 2.2.0 via use_old_releases.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The requested capability now exists: craft-archives commit 2171509 (PR #192, released in 2.2.0 per docs/changelog.rst) added craft_archives.defaults.use_old_releases, which rewrites both etc/apt/sources.list and the deb822 ubuntu.sources file to point at old-releases.ubuntu.com for EOL suites — exactly the 'change the repository URL' behavior this issue asks for, including for overlay roots. No activity on the issue since the 2025-07-03 Jira sync, so it can be closed as implemented rather than left open.","scores":{"impact":65,"quick_win":32.5,"staleness":55,"complexity":50,"confidence":72,"support_request":5},"age_days":436,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2025-07-03T21:49:40+00:00","updated_at":"2025-07-04T00:46:18+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":50,"support_request":5,"confidence":72,"impact":65,"quick_win":32.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":7046,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"4832","title":"`SNAPCRAFT_BUILD_ENVIRONMENT` takes priority over `--use-lxd`","author":"mr-cal","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/4832","summary":"SNAPCRAFT_BUILD_ENVIRONMENT was overriding the --use-lxd CLI flag; CRAFT_MANAGED_MODE precedence is intended per maintainer. Fixed by merged PR #4329 (commit 7f8d4cff9) which prioritizes the flag; issue remains open and can be closed.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The bug portion is fixed: merged PR #4329 (commit 7f8d4cff9, 'cli: prioritize --use-lxd over SNAPCRAFT_BUILD_ENVIRONMENT') is in current HEAD, and get_provider() now checks the CLI-provided provider before the env var. The maintainer also confirmed in a comment that CRAFT_MANAGED_MODE behavior is correct, so the original problem is no longer reproducible and the issue has been inactive for ~7 months.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":36.0,"staleness":55,"complexity":20,"confidence":85,"support_request":5},"age_days":834,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Bug"],"created_at":"2024-05-31T18:55:26+00:00","updated_at":"2026-01-28T18:35:32+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":20,"support_request":5,"confidence":85,"impact":45,"quick_win":36.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":2139,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"1990","title":"Cannot stage packages with charmcraft","author":"yanksyoon","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/1990","summary":"stage-packages in charmcraft.yaml fails with apt method driver error on ubuntu@24.04 base. Maintainer triaged as blocked by #1839 and #1844; reporter has workaround via apt operator library. Internal Jira CRAFT-4393 created. No activity since Jan 2026.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer @lengau explicitly triaged this as blocked by #1839 and #1844, both still open. An internal Jira ticket (CRAFT-4393) was created in March 2025, and a user added a related data point about stage-snaps in Jan 2026. The issue is valid, scoped, and tracked — it should remain open until the blocking work lands.","scores":{"impact":55,"quick_win":13.75,"staleness":55,"complexity":75,"confidence":80,"support_request":20},"age_days":668,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-11-14T06:17:23+00:00","updated_at":"2026-01-09T12:11:17+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":75,"support_request":20,"confidence":80,"impact":55,"quick_win":13.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":7000,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"4878","title":"Support interim ubuntu releases for kernel snaps","author":"mr-cal","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/4878","summary":"Enhancement to support interim Ubuntu releases (e.g. ubuntu@24.10) as build-bases for kernel snaps, backward compatibly. Triaged by maintainer; PoC PR #4914 merged but unusable as-is. Blockers #4921 and #5015 are now resolved. Not yet implemented in code.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is triaged (labeled Status: Triaged), authored by a maintainer, and the feature is confirmed unimplemented in code (build_base for kernel snaps is still Literal[\"core24\", \"core26\", \"devel\"]). Both referenced blockers (#4921 systemd-resolved fix, #5015 craft-platforms) are now closed, clearing the path for implementation. Last activity was ~7 months ago but the scope remains valid and unaddressed.","scores":{"impact":55,"quick_win":19.25,"staleness":55,"complexity":65,"confidence":75,"support_request":5},"age_days":808,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2024-06-26T20:46:47+00:00","updated_at":"2026-01-28T18:36:23+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":65,"support_request":5,"confidence":75,"impact":55,"quick_win":19.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":4182,"project_name":"imagecraft","source":"github","external_id":"285","title":"Support the Discoverable Partition Standard for GPT partitions","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/imagecraft/issues/285","summary":"Feature request to support Discoverable Partitions Specification GUIDs for GPT partitions in imagecraft. Triaged and tracked in Jira (IMAGECRAFT-100) but inactive for ~5.7 months with no implementation progress.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is labeled 'Status: Triaged' and has an internal Jira ticket (IMAGECRAFT-100), indicating it has been assessed and prioritized by maintainers. It is a legitimate feature request within the 6-month window, so it should remain open pending implementation.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":24.75,"staleness":55,"complexity":45,"confidence":75,"support_request":10},"age_days":185,"labels":["Status: Triaged"],"created_at":"2026-03-11T15:27:55+00:00","updated_at":"2026-03-11T16:20:09+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":45,"support_request":10,"confidence":75,"impact":45,"quick_win":24.75,"has_related_links":false},{"id":4207,"project_name":"imagecraft","source":"github","external_id":"260","title":"Native ability to specify image kernel variant","author":"rthill91","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/imagecraft/issues/260","summary":"Feature request for native kernel variant selection with automatic purging of other kernels. Maintainer acknowledged (Mar 2026) that kernels are only included when user specifies them, but investigation needed into which cases pull in unexpected kernels. No implementation yet.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer @lengau acknowledged the issue on 2026-03-27, stating 'we don't provide a kernel without the user specifying one' but 'we'll need to figure out what cases are including unexpected kernels.' The issue is labeled Type: Enhancement, triaged, and represents a valid gap for cloud image builders. No implementation or further investigation has occurred since, but the problem is still relevant and actionable.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":20.25,"staleness":55,"complexity":55,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":229,"labels":["Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2026-01-26T17:17:08+00:00","updated_at":"2026-03-27T16:38:36+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":55,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":45,"quick_win":20.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":6906,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"4972","title":"Cannot create a snap with base:bare in destructive mode","author":"nhathaway","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/4972","summary":"Snapcraft 8.3.2 fails with 'cannot determine build-for architecture' when building a base:bare snap in destructive mode without build-base. Maintainer confirmed build-base is required for bare and plans an earlier, clearer validation error.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Labelled Status: Triaged with maintainer @lengau acknowledging the report and stating 'we need to do here is ensure the existence of build-base gets checked earlier for base: bare so we can provide proper errors.' The reporter confirmed adding build-base: core20 works around it, but the confusing RuntimeError remains unfixed. Docs now state build-base is required for bare, yet no early validation exists in the current code.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"staleness":55,"complexity":40,"confidence":70,"support_request":20},"age_days":758,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Bug"],"created_at":"2024-08-15T14:03:41+00:00","updated_at":"2025-05-27T21:37:02+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":40,"support_request":20,"confidence":70,"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":5024,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"651","title":"Spread should run the doc tests with a nonroot user","author":"cjdcordeiro","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/651","summary":"Request to run Spread doc tests as a nonroot user to catch permission-related documentation issues (e.g. #649). Open 768 days, last activity 263 days ago, 0 comments, labeled Type: Documentation, authored by a maintainer. No evidence of implementation yet.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer-authored issue with a clear, actionable scope (add nonroot user execution to the docs spread suite) and a concrete motivating example (#649). No maintainer has closed or deprioritized it, and the referenced problem (docker socket permissions in tutorials) is still relevant. Last activity was ~8.5 months ago with no resolution, so it is moderately stale but not obsolete.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":26.0,"staleness":55,"complexity":35,"confidence":72,"support_request":5},"age_days":780,"labels":["Type: Documentation"],"created_at":"2024-07-24T10:21:08+00:00","updated_at":"2025-12-11T15:10:58+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":35,"support_request":5,"confidence":72,"impact":40,"quick_win":26.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":4477,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"1198","title":"docs: Rockcraft 1.18.0 documentation claims Ubuntu 26.04 support but it doesn't seem to work in the app","author":"GregCasbolt","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/1198","summary":"Rockcraft 1.18.0 docs claim ubuntu@26.04 build-base support but the app raises KeyError; maintainer confirmed 26.04 was devel-only then and promised a better error message. 26.04 is now stabilized in 1.19, so the core issue is resolved.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer tigarmo actively triaged this (2026-04-23), explained 26.04 was devel-only in 1.18, and explicitly committed: 'We'll improve that particular error message, thanks for the report!' The core 26.04 support was delivered in 1.19 (commit ad7df6a0, PR #1200, release notes confirm 'stable and recommended'), but the promised error-message improvement for the KeyError in get_plugin_group is not yet evident in the code, so the issue remains valid and open.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":33.75,"staleness":55,"complexity":25,"confidence":80,"support_request":30},"age_days":142,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-04-23T15:09:39+00:00","updated_at":"2026-04-27T12:28:03+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":25,"support_request":30,"confidence":80,"impact":45,"quick_win":33.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":6495,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"5384","title":"remote build: snapcraft incorrectly follows symlinks","author":"andrewphelpsj","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/5384","summary":"snapcraft remote-build fails on repos with broken symlinks because it follows them during upload. Triaged by maintainer who confirmed the fix belongs upstream in craft-application#721, which remains open. Awaiting upstream implementation.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer @mr-cal acknowledged the bug (2025-04-08) and explicitly stated 'The fix should be simple but we'll need to do it upstream (craft-application#721)'. That upstream issue is still open and the code in craft_application/remote/worktree.py still uses copytree without symlinks=True, confirming the bug persists. The issue is properly triaged and blocked on an upstream fix.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":31.5,"staleness":55,"complexity":30,"confidence":82,"support_request":5},"age_days":522,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Bug"],"created_at":"2025-04-08T20:42:53+00:00","updated_at":"2026-02-05T16:15:43+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":30,"support_request":5,"confidence":82,"impact":45,"quick_win":31.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":21718,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1367","title":"Craft parts swallows chisel errors if logging level is info or higher","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/1367","summary":"Chisel slice install errors are swallowed when log level is info or higher, so users see no chisel output or error message. Triaged bug with an internal Jira ticket (CRAFT-4872); no fix or maintainer response yet.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is labeled Status: Triaged and Type: Bug, and a maintainer (lengau) filed it with a reproducible part yaml, so it is a valid, acknowledged bug that should stay open. The only activity is the Jira sync bot (CRAFT-4872), with no fix or further discussion in ~10 months, making it moderately stale but still relevant. The code path in craft_parts/packages/deb.py _unpack_stage_slices captures chisel output via a logger StreamHandler and raises ChiselError, so the fix is likely localized to how that output is surfaced at info+ log levels.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":32.5,"staleness":55,"complexity":35,"confidence":70,"support_request":5},"age_days":333,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Bug"],"created_at":"2025-10-14T16:15:34+00:00","updated_at":"2025-10-14T16:28:09+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":35,"support_request":5,"confidence":70,"impact":50,"quick_win":32.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":5015,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"660","title":"Rockcraft parts `permissions` field follows symlinks when changing ownership.","author":"weiiwang01","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/660","summary":"Rockcraft parts permissions chown follows symlinks, causing FileNotFoundError when a symlink is processed before its target during prime. A fix PR was opened in craft-parts (#1059) and merged.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The bug is real and reproducible with a clear rockcraft.yaml reproducer. A maintainer (alithethird) acknowledged it and opened craft-parts PR #1059 which was merged, but the fix lives in the dependency craft-parts, not rockcraft itself, so this rockcraft issue should stay open until the dependency bump lands and is verified. The current craft-parts apply_permissions still calls os.chown without follow_symlinks=False, so I could not confirm the merged fix fully resolves the symlink-before-target ordering case.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"staleness":55,"complexity":40,"confidence":70,"support_request":5},"age_days":772,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-08-01T17:52:03+00:00","updated_at":"2025-04-03T08:52:11+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":40,"support_request":5,"confidence":70,"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":21576,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1513","title":"Make Java plugins work on Ubuntu 26.04","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/1513","summary":"Java plugin tests need updating for Ubuntu 26.04's default OpenJDK 25. Triaged by maintainer; PR #1530 added 26.04/JDK 25 handling to test fixtures, but CI still does not run Java plugin tests on 26.04 runners.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is triaged (labeled Status: Triaged) and PR #1530 (commit da6b596e, 'fix(test): enable the java plugin tests on resolute') added explicit 26.04/JDK 25 handling to the expected_jdk_version fixture in test_java.py. However, the qa.yaml CI workflow's test-java-plugins job still lists only 22.04/24.04/noble platforms, so 26.04 coverage is not yet active in CI. The issue remains valid until CI runners for 26.04 are added or the fix is confirmed complete.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":24.0,"staleness":55,"complexity":40,"confidence":72,"support_request":5},"age_days":173,"labels":["Status: Triaged"],"created_at":"2026-03-23T17:09:07+00:00","updated_at":"2026-03-23T17:09:26+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":40,"support_request":5,"confidence":72,"impact":40,"quick_win":24.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":6055,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"5836","title":"`enable-patchelf` build-attribute uses `ld` for the build-on host, not the build-for host","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/5836","summary":"Cross-compilation bug: enable-patchelf uses platform.machine() (build host arch) instead of target arch for dynamic linker, producing broken armhf snaps from arm64 hosts. Triaged with Jira ticket SNAPCRAFT-1287, no fix yet.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The bug is confirmed in code: get_dynamic_linker() in elf_utils.py uses platform.machine() rather than the target architecture, and patch_elf() in lifecycle.py calls get_arch_triplet() without passing the target arch. The issue is triaged (Status: Triaged label, Jira SNAPCRAFT-1287), the code still exhibits the bug, and no fix PR exists. Last human activity is absent but the bug remains valid and unfixed.","scores":{"impact":55,"quick_win":30.25,"staleness":55,"complexity":45,"confidence":82,"support_request":0},"age_days":326,"labels":["Status: Triaged"],"created_at":"2025-10-21T20:05:37+00:00","updated_at":"2026-02-05T16:09:10+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":45,"support_request":0,"confidence":82,"impact":55,"quick_win":30.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":6887,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"4991","title":"Allow disabling file-based keyring fallback","author":"mr-cal","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/4991","summary":"Enhancement to add SNAPCRAFT_DISABLE_FILE_BASED_KEYRING env var and docs so snapcraft can avoid the file-based keyring fallback, which hides keys from tools like ubuntu-image. Triaged (Status: Triaged, Type: Enhancement) but no implementation yet; craft-store already exposes a file_fallback flag.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is labelled Status: Triaged and Type: Enhancement with a Jira ticket (CRAFT-3272) created, so it has been assessed and is not stale-dead. The requested env var SNAPCRAFT_DISABLE_FILE_BASED_KEYRING is not present in the codebase, but craft-store's Auth already accepts a file_fallback parameter (default False), so the work is a small wiring change in snapcraft's StoreClientCLI plus documentation. Last activity was 215 days ago with only the Jira-sync bot comment, so it is moderately stale but still valid and actionable.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":26.0,"staleness":55,"complexity":35,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":753,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2024-08-20T15:08:44+00:00","updated_at":"2026-01-28T18:38:49+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":35,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":40,"quick_win":26.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":15189,"project_name":"craft-store","source":"github","external_id":"265","title":"Using token from `snapcraft export-login` as environment auth results in `craft_store.errors.CredentialsNotParseable`","author":"aywaldron","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-store/issues/265","summary":"User used wrong client class (StoreClient instead of UbuntuOneStoreClient) for u1-macaroon credentials, self-resolved. Maintainer re-scoped as wishlist to improve the CredentialsNotParseable error message by inspecting the token type field. Not yet implemented in current code.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer lengau explicitly triaged and re-scoped this as a wishlist item: 'I'm going to reopen this as a wishlist item because we do have a way to make a nicer error message by looking at the value of t in the macaroon dictionary.' Current code in creds.py still raises the generic 'Expected valid Candid credentials' without inspecting the t field, confirming the improvement remains unimplemented.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":18.75,"staleness":55,"complexity":25,"confidence":80,"support_request":65},"age_days":591,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-01-29T20:03:26+00:00","updated_at":"2025-05-01T16:43:33+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":25,"support_request":65,"confidence":80,"impact":25,"quick_win":18.75,"has_related_links":false},{"id":4497,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"1178","title":"list-extensions command to show experimental bases under experimental column","author":"f-atwi","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/1178","summary":"Feature request to add an 'Experimental bases' column to rockcraft list-extensions, matching charmcraft's output. Not yet implemented; command still only shows supported bases. No maintainer activity or labels on the issue.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is a well-scoped feature request with a clear reproducer and a concrete proposal (add an 'Experimental bases' column like charmcraft). The underlying data is already available — Extension.is_experimental(base) exists and the registry exposes it — so the change is low-complexity. However, the issue has no labels, no maintainer comments, and no assignee after 145 days, so it has not been triaged. The project is active (recent extension commits like #1315, #1320), so this is not stale-irrelevant, just unassessed.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":28.0,"staleness":55,"complexity":30,"confidence":80,"support_request":10},"age_days":157,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-04-08T14:58:21+00:00","updated_at":"2026-04-08T14:58:21+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":30,"support_request":10,"confidence":80,"impact":40,"quick_win":28.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":6410,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"5469","title":"package repository advance grammar support","author":"kubiko","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/5469","summary":"Request to add advanced grammar support for package-repositories to avoid duplicate apt sources in native builds. Triaged by maintainer with a concrete fix path (add to GrammarAwareModel in craft-application), but no PR or further activity since May 2025.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer mr-cal explicitly triaged this with a concrete fix plan: 'add package-repositories to the GrammarAwareModel' in craft-application. The issue is labelled 'Status: Triaged' and 'Type: Enhancement'. The fix is scoped and actionable but has not been implemented yet (GrammarAwareProject in craft-application still only has a 'parts' field). No PR has been opened to address it, so it remains open and valid.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":27.0,"staleness":55,"complexity":40,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":498,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2025-05-02T16:23:57+00:00","updated_at":"2025-05-02T16:33:49+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":45,"quick_win":27.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":6400,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"5479","title":"`test` command always builds with Ubuntu 24.04","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/5479","summary":"test command always builds with Ubuntu 24.04 for core22 snaps because it's a craft-application command not in the core22 lifecycle group; triaged with a suggested fix to raise an error for core22 base, but no fix has been implemented yet","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is triaged (labeled 'Status: Triaged') and a maintainer (mr-cal) acknowledged it with a concrete fix suggestion (override TestCommand to raise an error for core22 base). The bug is still present in the code: TestCommand is only in CORE24_LIFECYCLE_COMMAND_GROUP, not CORE22_LIFECYCLE_COMMAND_GROUP, so core22 snaps running 'snapcraft test' would incorrectly use the craft-application path and build with 24.04. The fix is straightforward (a small override in the command class) but hasn't been implemented yet, so the issue should remain open.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":35.0,"staleness":55,"complexity":30,"confidence":75,"support_request":0},"age_days":492,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Bug"],"created_at":"2025-05-08T17:19:44+00:00","updated_at":"2025-05-09T13:57:36+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":30,"support_request":0,"confidence":75,"impact":50,"quick_win":35.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":39532,"project_name":"craft-artifacts","source":"github","external_id":"89","title":"Test on Python 3.14 and Ubuntu 26.04 (Resolute)","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-artifacts/issues/89","summary":"CI enhancement request to add Python 3.14 and Ubuntu 26.04 testing. Unlabelled, no maintainer engagement after 93 days.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no maintainer comments, and no assignee after 93 days — it has not yet been assessed by a maintainer. While the request is valid (adding CI coverage for newer Python and Ubuntu versions), it needs triage to determine priority and whether similar work has been done in other projects.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":33.75,"staleness":55,"complexity":25,"confidence":60,"support_request":0},"age_days":101,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-06-03T15:47:23+00:00","updated_at":"2026-06-03T15:47:23+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":25,"support_request":0,"confidence":60,"impact":45,"quick_win":33.75,"has_related_links":false},{"id":4522,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"1153","title":"Feature request: support dynamically setting top-level `version` during build","author":"srbouffard","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/1153","summary":"Feature request to allow dynamically setting the top-level version field in rockcraft.yaml during build, enabling rock versions computed from workload version plus packaging increment. No maintainer response yet.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is a well-structured feature request with a clear use case (Mattermost packaging with rock revision), but has zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer acknowledgment after 164 days. The craftctl set version command already exists in the snap build hook (snap/snapcraft.yaml:171), suggesting the underlying mechanism may partially exist but needs verification for rockcraft.yaml top-level version support. This requires maintainer assessment of whether the feature is feasible within the current craft-application architecture.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":27.0,"staleness":55,"complexity":40,"confidence":60,"support_request":10},"age_days":176,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-03-20T18:49:05+00:00","updated_at":"2026-03-20T18:49:05+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":60,"impact":45,"quick_win":27.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":11854,"project_name":"debcraft","source":"github","external_id":"145","title":"[Feature] Add support for maintainer scripts","author":"hector-cao","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/debcraft/issues/145","summary":"Feature request to add support for Debian maintainer scripts (postinst, postrm, prerm, preinst) in debcraft, allowing developers to define script contents and enabling helpers to inject content. No maintainer response or labels yet.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is a well-structured feature request from an external contributor with no maintainer response, labels, or comments after 126 days. The project is actively developed (recent commits for ubuntu 26.10 support, installdebconf helper, lintian-overrides), but this specific feature has not been acknowledged. Maintainer scripts are fundamental to Debian packages, making this a legitimate and impactful request that needs triage.","scores":{"impact":65,"quick_win":29.25,"staleness":55,"complexity":55,"confidence":75,"support_request":10},"age_days":138,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-04-27T13:46:11+00:00","updated_at":"2026-04-27T13:46:11+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":55,"support_request":10,"confidence":75,"impact":65,"quick_win":29.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":6638,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"5241","title":"Give `organize` access to variables set during the build step","author":"dilyn-corner","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/5241","summary":"Enhancement request to allow the organize keyword to access build-environment variables and variables set during the build step. Triaged by a maintainer and tracked upstream in craft-parts#1076, which remains open with no progress.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer mr-cal explicitly endorsed the request on 2025-04-21 ('I think this is a good idea') and created upstream tracking issue craft-parts#1076, which is still open. The issue is triaged and valid, with a clear use case (kernel snaps needing build-time-known paths), so it should remain open pending upstream implementation.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":20.0,"staleness":55,"complexity":60,"confidence":75,"support_request":5},"age_days":583,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2025-02-06T18:53:39+00:00","updated_at":"2025-04-21T19:48:22+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":60,"support_request":5,"confidence":75,"impact":50,"quick_win":20.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":4605,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"1070","title":"build(pro): update to use pro guest attachment","author":"tigarmo","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/pull/1070","summary":"Updates craft-providers to the LXD guest-attachment version and pulls mainline snapcraft.yaml changes (uv plugin, pinned maturin) so the pro snap builds. Open 222 days, no review, CI failing on snap-tests, OSV-scanner, lint/files, fast/slow tests, diff-schema.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"The PR is 222 days old with zero comments and no reviewer, but it is a maintainer-authored build/dependency change that is still relevant: the current main already uses the uv plugin and craft-providers 3.7.1, and the guest-attachment config (lxd_guest_attach) is present in spread.yaml/docs, so the underlying work appears to have landed via other commits. Multiple CI checks are failing (snap-tests, OSV-scanner, lint/files, fast/slow tests, diff-schema), so it needs a maintainer to reconcile against current main and fix the failing checks before it can be merged.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":22.0,"staleness":55,"complexity":45,"confidence":55},"age_days":234,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-01-21T13:53:21+00:00","updated_at":"2026-01-21T14:25:45+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":45,"support_request":null,"confidence":55,"impact":40,"quick_win":22.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":4191,"project_name":"imagecraft","source":"github","external_id":"276","title":"Support human-friendly GPT partition types","author":"steinbro","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/imagecraft/issues/276","summary":"Feature request to let users write human-friendly names (e.g. linux-data, efi-system) for GPT partition types in imagecraft.yaml instead of raw GUIDs. The GptType enum exists in volume.py but is not exposed. Triaged, open, no progress in ~6 months.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is explicitly labeled 'Status: Triaged' and was filed by a maintainer (steinbro), so it has been assessed and acknowledged. The referenced GptType enum (volume.py:132) still exists and GPTStructureItem.structure_type still only accepts raw GUIDs, so the request remains valid and unimplemented. Related PR #286 added more GPT types to the enum but did not expose friendly names, and no commit or PR has since addressed this, so it should stay open rather than be closed as stale.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":26.0,"staleness":55,"complexity":35,"confidence":75,"support_request":5},"age_days":211,"labels":["Status: Triaged"],"created_at":"2026-02-13T13:40:44+00:00","updated_at":"2026-02-13T13:41:06+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":35,"support_request":5,"confidence":75,"impact":40,"quick_win":26.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":21696,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1390","title":"Warn on outward relative path sources","author":"bepri","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/1390","summary":"Feature request to warn when a part's source path resolves outside Path.cwd(), preventing unexpected behavior in managed builds. Triaged by maintainer bepri; @lengau expanded scope to also warn on absolute paths. No implementation found in codebase.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Issue is triaged (Status: Triaged label), authored by maintainer bepri, and has a follow-up comment from @lengau expanding scope to absolute paths. Code inspection confirms no outward-path warning exists in local_source.py or git_source.py. The feature is still relevant and unimplemented.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":29.25,"staleness":55,"complexity":35,"confidence":75,"support_request":10},"age_days":312,"labels":["Status: Triaged"],"created_at":"2025-11-04T12:45:44+00:00","updated_at":"2025-12-01T23:34:52+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":35,"support_request":10,"confidence":75,"impact":45,"quick_win":29.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":6222,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"5661","title":"Snapcraft hangs forever if a GitHub repository doesn't exist","author":"vandah","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/5661","summary":"Snapcraft hangs indefinitely on Pulling when a git source is missing/private because git prompts for credentials. Triaged by maintainers; fix identified (GIT_TERMINAL_PROMPT=0) but must be implemented in craft-parts, not yet done.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainers actively triaged this (Status: Triaged label) and identified the fix: lengau noted 'We can set GIT_TERMINAL_PROMPT=0 in the environment, but I think that needs to be done by craft-parts.' A grep of craft-parts confirms GIT_TERMINAL_PROMPT is not yet set anywhere, so the bug remains unfixed. The issue is valid, scoped, and awaiting implementation in the upstream craft-parts dependency.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":32.5,"staleness":55,"complexity":35,"confidence":80,"support_request":5},"age_days":407,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Bug"],"created_at":"2025-08-01T14:36:04+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-12T19:47:40+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":35,"support_request":5,"confidence":80,"impact":50,"quick_win":32.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":12124,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"965","title":"snapcraft internal error: AttributeError(\"'list' object has no attribute 'get'\")","author":"xypron","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/issues/965","summary":"snapcraft crashes with AttributeError('list' object has no attribute 'get') when a platforms entry is a YAML list instead of a dict; reporter wants a clear schema-validation error. Triaged and moved to craft-application (CRAFT-4929); bug still present in current code.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer @lengau acknowledged on 2025-12-02 ('You're absolutely right that this is poor error presentation') and moved it to craft-application with Jira ticket CRAFT-4929, so it is triaged and valid. I verified the bug is still live: _vectorise_platforms in craft_application/services/project.py still calls data.get('build-for') without checking that data is a dict, so a list-valued platforms entry (as in the repro) still raises AttributeError before pydantic validation can produce a friendly error. No fix commit has landed since.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":35.0,"staleness":55,"complexity":30,"confidence":75,"support_request":10},"age_days":318,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Bug"],"created_at":"2025-10-29T11:08:20+00:00","updated_at":"2025-12-02T15:21:34+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":30,"support_request":10,"confidence":75,"impact":50,"quick_win":35.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":3300,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"826","title":"Include charm revision for upload errors of type already exists in database","author":"hemanthnakkina","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/826","summary":"Feature request to include charm revision number in upload error messages when a package already exists in the database. Maintainer acknowledged and opened snapstore-server bug 1987284; blocked on Charmhub API providing the revision in error responses. No activity in ~1 year.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer facundobatista acknowledged the request on 2022-08-22 and opened snapstore-server bug 1987284 to track the Charmhub-side change needed. The issue is blocked by an external dependency (Charmhub API must include revision in error responses), not abandoned. Code in store.py still passes through error messages verbatim without revision context, confirming the feature remains unimplemented.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":15.0,"staleness":55,"complexity":40,"confidence":78,"support_request":10},"age_days":1494,"labels":[],"created_at":"2022-08-11T09:20:17+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:18:33+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":78,"impact":25,"quick_win":15.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":4938,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"737","title":"doc: use the Pebble docs","author":"cjdcordeiro","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/737","summary":"Doc improvement to reshape the Pebble explanation page to rely on official Pebble docs. Intersphinx mapping updated to new Pebble docs URL, but the page's main Pebble link still points to GitHub and the page hasn't been reshaped.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The intersphinx mapping was updated to point to https://ubuntu.com/docs/pebble (PR #1274), partially addressing the issue, but the main 'Pebble' link in docs/explanation/pebble.rst still points to https://github.com/canonical/pebble and the page hasn't been reshaped to rely more on the Pebble docs as requested. A maintainer comment 283 days ago reinforced the need to redirect users to the docs rather than the GitHub repo.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":22.5,"staleness":55,"complexity":25,"confidence":72,"support_request":5},"age_days":692,"labels":["Type: Documentation"],"created_at":"2024-10-21T08:06:27+00:00","updated_at":"2025-11-21T15:26:17+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":25,"support_request":5,"confidence":72,"impact":30,"quick_win":22.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":6064,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"5827","title":"The uv plugin reference does not explain the dependencies","author":"bepri","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/5827","summary":"Snapcraft's uv plugin docs omit the craft-parts 'Dependencies' section (uv-deps/astral-uv provisioning), causing user confusion. Triaged, tracked as SNAPCRAFT-1250, awaiting a doc fix.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Triaged (Status: Triaged, Type: Documentation) and tracked as SNAPCRAFT-1250, with a maintainer comment (2025-10-23) noting the fix will be easier once uv becomes an official Canonical snap. The underlying doc gap is still present: snapcraft's uv_plugin.rst includes the craft-parts file but the Dependencies section is not surfaced in the snapcraft docs, so the issue remains valid and should stay open.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":36.0,"staleness":55,"complexity":10,"confidence":80,"support_request":10},"age_days":332,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Documentation"],"created_at":"2025-10-15T12:49:09+00:00","updated_at":"2025-10-23T20:00:07+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":10,"support_request":10,"confidence":80,"impact":40,"quick_win":36.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":16257,"project_name":"starflow","source":"github","external_id":"127","title":"feat: Create workflow for testing dev environments","author":"me6262","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/starflow/pull/127","summary":"WIP workflow creating LXD containers in GitHub Actions to test makefile dev-environment commands, referenced as work for #85. No maintainer review, CLA check failing, author notes it fails when run; no activity for 143 days.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"The PR is a small (+61/-0, 2 files) WIP dev-tooling workflow with no maintainer engagement in 143 days, a failing Canonical CLA check, and the author's own note that it fails when run due to missing packages. It is not clearly irrelevant or superseded, so it should be routed to a maintainer to decide whether to shepherd it (and whether the missing-package fix belongs in this PR) rather than closed outright.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":55,"complexity":40,"confidence":60},"age_days":155,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-04-10T18:43:15+00:00","updated_at":"2026-04-10T20:18:49+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":40,"support_request":null,"confidence":60,"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":4183,"project_name":"imagecraft","source":"github","external_id":"284","title":"Support recommended dependencies in overlay-packages","author":"rthill91","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/imagecraft/issues/284","summary":"Feature request for a flag/config to install recommended dependencies when using overlay-packages in imagecraft. No maintainer activity in 175 days, but craft-parts (the underlying library) recently added an overlay-recommended-packages key that provides exactly this capability.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no comments, and no maintainer response in 175 days, so it has not been triaged. However, it should not be closed as stale because the underlying craft-parts library recently added an `overlay-recommended-packages` key (craft-parts PR #1651) that directly addresses this request — imagecraft likely just needs to expose/document it in its PartSpec reference, which currently only lists `overlay_packages`.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":35.0,"staleness":55,"complexity":30,"confidence":70,"support_request":20},"age_days":187,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-03-09T16:43:56+00:00","updated_at":"2026-03-09T16:43:56+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":30,"support_request":20,"confidence":70,"impact":50,"quick_win":35.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":13379,"project_name":"craft-cli","source":"github","external_id":"361","title":"Remove the default command","author":"mr-cal","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-cli/issues/361","summary":"Maintainer task to remove the Dispatcher's default_command/allow_default_command support (added for Snapcraft compat). Feature still present in code; removal gated on Snapcraft 10 (core28) release. No labels, 0 comments.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The body explicitly gates removal on an external dependency: 'Craft-cli can fully drop support when Snapcraft 10 (core28) is released.' The feature is still live in craft_cli/dispatcher.py (default_command/allow_default_command params and the 'Running snapcraft without a command' error path), so the task remains valid and not obsolete. It was authored by a maintainer as a known task, so it is already assessed rather than untriaged.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":20.25,"staleness":55,"complexity":55,"confidence":80,"support_request":0},"age_days":424,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-07-15T13:45:55+00:00","updated_at":"2026-03-02T19:15:58+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":55,"support_request":0,"confidence":80,"impact":45,"quick_win":20.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":5856,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"6064","title":"Extend advanced grammer to all keys of snapcraft","author":"soumyaDghosh","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/6064","summary":"Request to extend advanced grammar (on/to/else) to all snapcraft.yaml keys (apps, plugin params like cmake-parameters, per-arch part skipping). Grammar currently limited to 6 part keys. Unlabeled; cross-referenced to craft-application#985.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"No labels, assignee, or maintainer response in this issue; the only comment (187 days ago) is a user cross-reference to craft-application#985, which is open and acknowledged for the plugin-parameters portion but does not triage this issue. Code confirms the request is unimplemented: snapcraft/parts/grammar.py restricts grammar to source, build-environment, build-packages, stage-packages, build-snaps, stage-snaps, and GrammarAwareProject models only those fields.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":15.75,"staleness":55,"complexity":65,"confidence":75,"support_request":15},"age_days":201,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-02-24T07:01:18+00:00","updated_at":"2026-02-25T05:20:33+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":65,"support_request":15,"confidence":75,"impact":45,"quick_win":15.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":4137,"project_name":"imagecraft","source":"github","external_id":"330","title":"fix: synchronize with udev via BSD flock after losetup to avoid race condition","author":"Copilot","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/imagecraft/pull/330","summary":"Adds BSD flock synchronization after losetup to avoid the udev race on loop partition nodes, in both pack and services attach paths, with unit and root integration tests. Changes requested; 6 unresolved comments; lint/files failing; awaiting maintainer review of latest commit.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"After lengau's 2026-05-03 request for an integration test, the author added test_attach_images_partition_nodes_exist in 8cc64c5, but no maintainer has reviewed that commit and the review status remains changes_requested with 6 unresolved comments plus a failing lint/files check. The underlying issue #300 is still open and was hit in CI ~19 days ago, so the PR is still relevant and needs a maintainer review of the latest iteration rather than closure.","scores":{"impact":55,"quick_win":22.0,"staleness":55,"complexity":60,"confidence":75},"age_days":144,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-04-21T22:07:34+00:00","updated_at":"2026-05-03T00:47:33+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":true,"staleness":55,"complexity":60,"support_request":null,"confidence":75,"impact":55,"quick_win":22.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":12282,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"792","title":"http auth token occasionally leaked","author":"setharnold","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/issues/792","summary":"Remote-build git push can leak the Launchpad access token in error logs. Triaged as a bug; fix identified as censoring the token from git's error output, but no fix commit found yet.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Labelled Status: Triaged with a Jira ticket (CRAFT-4624) and a second reporter confirming the bug. The code at remotebuild.py:312 embeds the token in the push URL, and while _git_repo.py push_url strips the token from its own debug log, git's stderr (logged via logger.error) still contains the full URL with token, as shown in the issue's log output. No fix commit found in git history.","scores":{"impact":70,"quick_win":38.5,"staleness":55,"complexity":45,"confidence":75,"support_request":5},"age_days":443,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Bug"],"created_at":"2025-06-27T01:24:19+00:00","updated_at":"2025-06-27T16:53:10+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":45,"support_request":5,"confidence":75,"impact":70,"quick_win":38.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":4162,"project_name":"imagecraft","source":"github","external_id":"305","title":"Generate sparse images","author":"alderic-coroir","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/imagecraft/issues/305","summary":"Feature request to have imagecraft generate sparse images (e.g. via img2simg) for Ubuntu Core, since field deployments only use/deliver sparse images. Untriaged: no labels, no comments, no activity in 158 days; feature confirmed absent from codebase.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no assignee, and zero comments or maintainer response in 158 days, so it has never been assessed. The request is legitimate and verifiably unimplemented (no img2simg/simg support anywhere in imagecraft/pack or commit history), and the reporter — a maintainer — argues it blocks deliverable Ubuntu Core images, so it warrants triage rather than closure.","scores":{"impact":55,"quick_win":30.25,"staleness":55,"complexity":45,"confidence":80,"support_request":10},"age_days":171,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-03-26T07:40:04+00:00","updated_at":"2026-03-26T07:40:04+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":45,"support_request":10,"confidence":80,"impact":55,"quick_win":30.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":2973,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"1154","title":"Use craft-application's store service","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/1154","summary":"Refactor Store class into a craft-application Service and migrate store commands to AppCommand subclasses. Partially done: StoreService exists (PR #1459) and commands are AppCommand subclasses, but the legacy Store class is still used directly in 15+ places in store.py.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The store service was created in PR #1459 and commands are already AppCommand subclasses via CharmcraftCommand, but charmcraft/store/store.py still defines the legacy Store class which is instantiated directly 15+ times in application/commands/store.py. The refactoring is partially complete and still relevant; no maintainer has closed or deprioritized it.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":12.0,"staleness":55,"complexity":60,"confidence":70,"support_request":0},"age_days":1157,"labels":[],"created_at":"2023-07-13T12:41:18+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:18:24+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":60,"support_request":0,"confidence":70,"impact":30,"quick_win":12.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":12452,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"621","title":"remote build: `--recover` looking for the wrong repository","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/issues/621","summary":"remote build --recover fails with NotFoundError because resume_builds looks up the Launchpad git repo by name/owner only, omitting the project it was created under. Triaged bug, still open, no fix in current code.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The bug is confirmed in current code: resume_builds() calls _get_repository() which does self.lp.get_repository(name=self._name, owner=self.lp.username), while _ensure_repository() creates the repo with project=self._lp_project, so the resume path resolves to ~owner/+git/name instead of ~owner/project/name. Issue is labelled Status: Triaged, Type: Bug, has an internal ticket (CRAFT-4030), and last activity was 215 days ago, so it should remain open.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":35.0,"staleness":55,"complexity":30,"confidence":85,"support_request":0},"age_days":592,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Bug"],"created_at":"2025-01-29T00:09:34+00:00","updated_at":"2026-01-28T18:32:16+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":30,"support_request":0,"confidence":85,"impact":50,"quick_win":35.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":39747,"project_name":"craft-platforms","source":"github","external_id":"85","title":"Allow `devel` in multi-base builds","author":"mr-cal","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-platforms/issues/85","summary":"Enhancement to allow `devel` build bases in multi-base charm builds. Triaged with maintainer discussion on implementation approach.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is triaged and has active maintainer discussion (@lengau's 2025-01-22 comment proposing implementation approach: allow `devel` in `build-on` and support `ubuntu@devel` as a synonym). This is a valid enhancement request with maintainer buy-in that should remain open for implementation.","scores":{"impact":55,"quick_win":30.25,"staleness":55,"complexity":45,"confidence":75,"support_request":15},"age_days":632,"labels":["Type: Enhancement","Status: Triaged"],"created_at":"2024-12-19T21:39:56+00:00","updated_at":"2026-04-21T20:21:13+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":45,"support_request":15,"confidence":75,"impact":55,"quick_win":30.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":4319,"project_name":"imagecraft","source":"github","external_id":"148","title":"Keep overlayfs mounted when running with --debug and something fails","author":"toabctl","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/imagecraft/issues/148","summary":"imagecraft unmounts overlayfs before dropping into the --debug shell when an overlay-script fails, making it hard to inspect the failed state. Workaround is manual fuse-overlayfs remount. A maintainer (lengau) asked whether craft-parts should handle this, but no fix has landed.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is a legitimate bug/feature request with a clear reproduction and a concrete workaround documented by the reporter. A maintainer (lengau) engaged on 2025-08-14 by asking whether craft-parts should handle this, indicating the issue is acknowledged and under consideration. The last activity was 382 days ago (~12.5 months), which is moderately stale, but the issue is not irrelevant — the overlay unmount behavior in craft-parts (overlay_manager.py unmount() called before the debug shell) is still present in the current codebase. The fix would likely require a small change in craft-parts to skip unmounting when --debug is active, or a callback in imagecraft to remount. This is not a support request and not stale enough to close.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":27.0,"staleness":55,"complexity":40,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":482,"labels":["Type: Bug"],"created_at":"2025-05-19T07:11:37+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-14T04:53:26+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":45,"quick_win":27.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":3926,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"195","title":"create-lib should explain what it is about to do and ask for confirmation","author":"markshuttle","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/195","summary":"Enhancement request for charmcraft create-lib to print a summary of the library it will create and ask for confirmation before creating it. Triaged (labelled, synced to internal Jira ticket CHARMCRAFT-653), but no implementation yet.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is labelled 'Status: Triaged' and 'Type: Enhancement' and was synced to internal ticket CHARMCRAFT-653 in September 2025, so it has been acknowledged and is not stale. The current CreateLibCommand.run() in charmcraft/application/commands/store.py still calls store.create_library_id() and writes the template file without any confirmation prompt, so the requested behaviour is not implemented. It is a small, well-scoped UX improvement, so it should remain open.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":22.5,"staleness":55,"complexity":25,"confidence":70,"support_request":0},"age_days":2127,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2020-11-15T14:33:00+00:00","updated_at":"2025-09-17T19:48:16+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":25,"support_request":0,"confidence":70,"impact":30,"quick_win":22.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":12042,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"1032","title":"Some fetch service tests are hard-coded to amd64","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/issues/1032","summary":"Fetch service tests hard-coded to amd64 need to run on any architecture. Triaged (CRAFT-5057); CI now runs Python tests on arm64, but no fix commit found yet.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is triaged with a Jira ticket (CRAFT-5057) and the maintainer authored it, so it is acknowledged and valid. Related work shows CI now runs Python tests on arm64 (#1030), making this more relevant, but no commit yet removes the amd64 hard-coding from fetch service tests, so it should stay open.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":26.0,"staleness":55,"complexity":35,"confidence":60,"support_request":0},"age_days":179,"labels":["Status: Triaged"],"created_at":"2026-03-17T17:49:47+00:00","updated_at":"2026-03-17T17:52:36+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":35,"support_request":0,"confidence":60,"impact":40,"quick_win":26.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":1760,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2376","title":"docs: options for links in charmcraft unclear","author":"marcusboden","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/2376","summary":"charmcraft.yaml links section docs don't list allowed fields (contact, documentation, issues, source, website). Maintainer acknowledged and pointed to model definition; docs redo in progress but not yet merged.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer @lengau acknowledged the issue on 2025-07-22, confirmed the valid fields are defined in the Links model (contact, documentation, issues, source, website), and noted @jahn-junior is redoing these docs. The current docs still lack an explicit structure listing for links, so the gap persists. Valid, triaged, and awaiting the docs rework.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":55,"complexity":10,"confidence":78,"support_request":20},"age_days":422,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-07-17T11:32:48+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:17:45+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":10,"support_request":20,"confidence":78,"impact":20,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":5163,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"512","title":"Document `overlay-packages`","author":"alnvdl-work","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/512","summary":"Docs gap: overlay-packages missing from Rockcraft part_properties reference. The referenced page now redirects to rockcraft.yaml, which documents overlay parameters via an included craft-parts fragment, so the gap is likely resolved. No maintainer activity in 263 days.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is a valid documentation gap (label Type: Documentation) but has zero comments and no maintainer acknowledgement, so it is untriaged. The referenced part_properties page now redirects to rockcraft.yaml, which includes the craft-parts overlay_parameters fragment documenting overlay-packages, so a maintainer should verify the current docs before closing.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":21.25,"staleness":55,"complexity":15,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":908,"labels":["Type: Documentation"],"created_at":"2024-03-18T18:50:45+00:00","updated_at":"2025-12-11T15:02:36+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":15,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":25,"quick_win":21.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":12742,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"331","title":"Process grammar and non-grammar dictionary data","author":"mr-cal","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/issues/331","summary":"Feature request to make the `organize` keyword handle a mix of grammar entries (e.g. `on amd64 to arm64:`) and plain non-grammar dict entries in the same list, merging them into a single dict. Currently only pure-grammar lists are processed.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue was filed by a maintainer (mr-cal) with a clear reproduction and expected output, and an internal Jira ticket (CRAFT-2862) was created, indicating it was triaged and acknowledged. The current code in `craft_application/grammar.py` (`process_part`) does accept a list of dicts/strings, but whether the underlying `craft_grammar` `GrammarProcessor.process` correctly merges non-grammar dict entries alongside grammar entries is not evident from the repo alone — the `merge_processed_dict` helper only merges the grammar-processed results. No PR or commit in the history references this issue or implements mixed grammar/non-grammar dict merging for `organize`, so it appears still open.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":27.0,"staleness":55,"complexity":40,"confidence":60,"support_request":10},"age_days":865,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-04-30T12:36:55+00:00","updated_at":"2025-05-23T17:26:55+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":60,"impact":45,"quick_win":27.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":22273,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"812","title":"maven plugin should install maven build-package","author":"vpa1977","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/812","summary":"Maven plugin requires mvn pre-installed; reporter wants build-packages auto-added. Maintainers triaged (CRAFT-3257) and discussed making it behave like rust plugin. A self-contained build attribute was later added to maven/gradle plugins, partially addressing the need.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer tigarmo explicitly triaged this as intentional design and lengau proposed changing it to behave like the rust plugin (auto-install system maven when no maven-deps part exists), with an internal ticket CRAFT-3257 created. The maven plugin still returns an empty get_build_packages() set, so the core request (auto-install maven/jdk) is not implemented in craft-parts; the later self-contained build attribute only addresses dependency mirroring, not the missing mvn binary. This is a valid, acknowledged feature request that remains unaddressed.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":27.5,"staleness":55,"complexity":45,"confidence":60,"support_request":25},"age_days":758,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-08-15T23:36:49+00:00","updated_at":"2025-03-11T14:28:37+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":45,"support_request":25,"confidence":60,"impact":50,"quick_win":27.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":12746,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"327","title":"Support argument list passthrough","author":"cmatsuoka","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/issues/327","summary":"Enhancement to allow raw CLI argument passthrough to spread in the test command, addressing double-dash vs single-dash inconsistencies. Open since 2023, no implementation found in current code.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue was filed by a maintainer (cmatsuoka) with a clear scope: change argument parsing to collect raw arguments instead of parsed ones, and fix double-dash vs single-dash inconsistencies. The current TestCommand in lifecycle.py still only accepts test_expressions as a positional nargs='*' argument with no raw passthrough mechanism. The referenced Charmcraft PR (#1660) passes raw command line to spread, confirming this is still needed. No implementation found in recent commits, and the issue remains relevant to the test command's functionality.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"staleness":55,"complexity":40,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":866,"labels":["Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2024-04-29T14:21:06+00:00","updated_at":"2025-11-14T14:34:45+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":12040,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"1034","title":"`test` command fails to allocate LXD VMs when verbosity is `verbose` or `debug`","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/issues/1034","summary":"test command fails to allocate LXD VMs when verbosity is verbose or debug; spread backend allocate command returns empty ADDRESS. Triaged, no fix yet.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is triaged (label: Status: Triaged, Type: Bug) with a clear reproduction and root cause visible in the code: emit.open_stream captures stdout, and at higher verbosity levels the emitter writes to stdout, corrupting the ADDRESS=$(...) command substitution in the spread backend allocate script. No fix commit found in testing.py history addressing this specific verbosity interaction.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"staleness":55,"complexity":40,"confidence":60,"support_request":0},"age_days":179,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Bug"],"created_at":"2026-03-17T22:34:16+00:00","updated_at":"2026-03-17T22:35:04+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":40,"support_request":0,"confidence":60,"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":11957,"project_name":"debcraft","source":"github","external_id":"42","title":"Validate `depends` and related fields","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/debcraft/issues/42","summary":"Feature request to add validation for the depends field and related Debian relationship fields (recommends, suggests, provides, breaks, replaces, conflicts) in debcraft package models, ideally upstreamed to python-debian. Open since Nov 2025 with no labels, no assignee, and no further activity.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is a feature request from a maintainer (lengau) to validate the depends field and related fields in debcraft package models. It has no labels, no assignee, and only one comment (the original body with a link to Debian policy). The code in debcraft/models/package.py still has a comment referencing this issue (#42) with the same Debian policy link, confirming it's not yet implemented. No evidence of a fix or related PR exists in the commit history.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":22.5,"staleness":55,"complexity":55,"confidence":70,"support_request":5},"age_days":297,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-11-19T15:28:02+00:00","updated_at":"2025-11-19T15:28:45+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":55,"support_request":5,"confidence":70,"impact":50,"quick_win":22.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":22186,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"899","title":"Craft parts should close stdin when cloning git projects","author":"mr-cal","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/899","summary":"Git source handler in craft-parts does not close stdin when cloning, causing hangs when repos require credentials. Filed by maintainer mr-cal; only a Jira-sync bot comment exists. No fix found in git_source.py or base.py _run.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue was filed by a maintainer (mr-cal) with a clear two-part scope (close stdin like deb.py does, and raise a friendly error for credential prompts) and a Jira ticket (CRAFT-3660) was auto-created, but no maintainer has labelled, assigned, or responded substantively. The code in git_source.py still calls self._run() without stdin=DEVNULL, confirming the bug persists. It needs triage to be prioritised and assigned.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":32.5,"staleness":55,"complexity":35,"confidence":72,"support_request":5},"age_days":674,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-11-07T19:04:48+00:00","updated_at":"2025-03-11T14:28:46+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":35,"support_request":5,"confidence":72,"impact":50,"quick_win":32.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":11872,"project_name":"debcraft","source":"github","external_id":"127","title":"Run lintian automatically as a linter","author":"steinbro","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/debcraft/issues/127","summary":"Feature request to run lintian automatically during builds to validate output packages. Triaged and tracked in Jira (DEBCRAFT-63) but not yet implemented; existing lintian helper only installs override files, not runs validation.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is properly triaged with a 'Status: Triaged' label, created by a maintainer, and has an internal Jira ticket (DEBCRAFT-63) for tracking. The feature is not yet implemented — the existing lintian helper (PR #153) only installs lintian-overrides files rather than running lintian validation. No evidence of abandonment or obsolescence; it remains a valid feature request.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":27.5,"staleness":55,"complexity":45,"confidence":72,"support_request":10},"age_days":152,"labels":["Status: Triaged"],"created_at":"2026-04-13T17:08:19+00:00","updated_at":"2026-04-13T17:08:49+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":45,"support_request":10,"confidence":72,"impact":50,"quick_win":27.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":4163,"project_name":"imagecraft","source":"github","external_id":"304","title":"Support multiple volumes in imagecraft.yaml","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/imagecraft/issues/304","summary":"Feature request to allow multiple second-level keys under volumes in imagecraft.yaml for devices with multiple physical drives. Unlabelled, no comments, no assignee; code still enforces max_length=1 on VolumeDictT.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no comments, no assignee, and no maintainer response in 159 days. The code at imagecraft/models/project.py:85 still enforces max_length=1 on VolumeDictT, confirming the feature is unimplemented. Although the author is a maintainer, there is no sign of categorisation or prioritisation.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":15.75,"staleness":55,"complexity":65,"confidence":78,"support_request":5},"age_days":171,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-03-25T17:54:33+00:00","updated_at":"2026-03-25T17:54:33+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":65,"support_request":5,"confidence":78,"impact":45,"quick_win":15.75,"has_related_links":false},{"id":15158,"project_name":"craft-store","source":"github","external_id":"296","title":"Charmhub integration tests are getting skipped in CI","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-store/issues/296","summary":"Charmhub integration tests are skipped in CI because CRAFT_STORE_CHARMCRAFT_CREDENTIALS is not set in the QA workflow. Triaged and tracked in Jira (CRAFT-4676) but no fix has been merged.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is triaged (Status: Triaged label) and tracked in Jira (CRAFT-4676). The QA workflow currently passes STAGING_SSO_USERNAME/PASSWORD but does not pass CRAFT_STORE_CHARMCRAFT_CREDENTIALS, which is why the charmhub tests are skipped. The fix is straightforward (add the secret to the workflow) but requires a valid staging credential to be configured in the repo's GitHub secrets, which is an operational step outside the codebase. No fix commit has been found in the git history.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":35.0,"staleness":55,"complexity":30,"confidence":70,"support_request":0},"age_days":439,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Bug"],"created_at":"2025-06-30T16:09:39+00:00","updated_at":"2025-07-30T18:14:45+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":30,"support_request":0,"confidence":70,"impact":50,"quick_win":35.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":7608,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"4268","title":"[cross-compile] when a deb package that has a dependency to non-architecture deb package, snapcraft does not recognize that and throws a dependency error","author":"bugraaydogar","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/4268","summary":"Cross-compiling a core22 snap with an arch-pinned stage package (gpsd-clients:arm64) fails with 'unmet dependencies: python3-serial' because non-arch-specific deps aren't resolved for the target arch. Maintainer offered a workaround and asked if it reproduces on core24; no reply yet.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"A maintainer (mr-cal) engaged on 2026-01-27, confirmed the workaround (gpsd-tools:$CRAFT_ARCH_BUILD_FOR), noted cross-compiling improvements in Snapcraft 8.8 for core24, and explicitly asked whether the problem still replicates on core24. The reporter has not yet responded, so the issue is awaiting information from the original author rather than being stale or untriaged. The underlying bug (arch-pinned stage packages pinning all dependencies to that arch, and host-arch staging without an explicit suffix) is a real cross-compilation defect, not a support question.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":15.0,"staleness":55,"complexity":70,"confidence":60,"support_request":20},"age_days":1159,"labels":["Status: Needs information"],"created_at":"2023-07-11T13:51:23+00:00","updated_at":"2026-01-27T21:26:04+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":70,"support_request":20,"confidence":60,"impact":50,"quick_win":15.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":15601,"project_name":"snapcraft-rocks","source":"github","external_id":"109","title":"Failed to pull source: unable to determine source type of '/usr/share/snapcraft/extensions/ros2'","author":"jkbeg","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft-rocks/issues/109","summary":"Snapcraft 8 Docker image (ghcr.io/canonical/snapcraft:8_core22) fails to resolve ros2 extension: get_extensions_data_dir() returns /usr/share/snapcraft/extensions but extensions live in site-packages. Triaged, acknowledged by maintainer, workaround shared, still open.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer @lengau acknowledged on 2025-10-10 that 'we're not organizing the extension scripts to somewhere where they'd be expected' and created internal ticket SNAPCRAFT-1249, so the issue is triaged and valid. The code still hardcodes Path(sys.prefix)/'share'/'snapcraft'/'extensions' in extension.py, and a community workaround (symlink) was posted 2026-01-29, confirming the bug persists. The Dockerfile was removed in #5063 in favor of the snapcraft-rocks registry, so the fix likely belongs in snapcraft-rocks image packaging, but the underlying path mismatch remains unfixed.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"staleness":55,"complexity":40,"confidence":80,"support_request":10},"age_days":340,"labels":["Type: Bug","Status: Triaged"],"created_at":"2025-10-08T08:54:46+00:00","updated_at":"2026-01-29T06:44:34+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":80,"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":12735,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"338","title":"`pack` command gives wrong help message and doesn't support packing a directory","author":"mr-cal","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/issues/338","summary":"Pack command help incorrectly referenced part-name (fixed in #341) and no way to pack a directory without a project file (still open).","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The part-name help message issue was fixed in commit 13230eda (#341) which removed the 'parts' argument from PackCommand. However, the second part of the issue — no straightforward way to pack a directory without a project file — remains unaddressed, as PackCommand still has always_load_project = True. The issue was created by a maintainer and synced to JIRA (CRAFT-2870), indicating it is tracked internally.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":21.0,"staleness":55,"complexity":40,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":864,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-05-01T18:27:57+00:00","updated_at":"2025-05-23T17:27:03+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":35,"quick_win":21.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":41682,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2804","title":"Fix spread different-dir artifact output handling","author":"lengau","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/pull/2804","summary":"Fixes artifact output directory handling when using --project-dir with spread tests; adds unit regressions. Awaiting human review with 2 unresolved automated comments.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"This is a legitimate bug fix from maintainer lengau addressing artifact relocation when --project-dir differs from output dir. It adds unit tests (test_move_artifacts_to_output_dir, test_move_artifacts_creates_output_dir) and a fallback mechanism. However, it has sat 46 days with 0 human comments and 2 unresolved automated review comments, so a maintainer review is needed to address those comments and merge.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":35.0,"staleness":55,"complexity":30,"confidence":70},"age_days":54,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-07-20T23:21:59+00:00","updated_at":"2026-07-20T23:24:10+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":30,"support_request":null,"confidence":70,"impact":50,"quick_win":35.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":2122,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2007","title":"`status` command has wrong headers","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/2007","summary":"charmcraft status command displays 'Channel' header instead of 'Risk' and omits a Branch column when branch releases exist. Reported by a maintainer, synced to Jira (CRAFT-3717), but no fix has landed in the codebase as of the latest commit.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue was filed by a maintainer (lengau) and synced to internal Jira (CRAFT-3717), indicating it was acknowledged. The current code at line 1140 of store.py still uses headers = [\"Track\", \"Base\", \"Channel\", \"Version\", \"Revision\"] with no Branch column, confirming the bug persists. Last activity was 381 days ago with no fix merged, but the issue remains valid and relevant to the current codebase.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":24.0,"staleness":55,"complexity":20,"confidence":72,"support_request":0},"age_days":654,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-11-27T16:08:45+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:18:03+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":20,"support_request":0,"confidence":72,"impact":30,"quick_win":24.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":12580,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"493","title":"Use a craft-providers callback hook to set the apt proxy by an app config","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/issues/493","summary":"Feature request to add an apt_proxy app config option and use a craft-providers callback hook to configure apt proxy in build instances. No maintainer response or labels; only a Jira bot comment. ProxyService exists but lacks apt_proxy config support.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"No maintainer has responded, labelled, or assigned this issue (only a Jira bot comment). The proxy service area has been actively developed (PRs #823, #849), but the specific apt_proxy config option is not yet implemented (no matches for 'apt_proxy' in codebase). Needs a maintainer to assess whether this is still wanted given the existing ProxyService architecture.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":27.0,"staleness":55,"complexity":40,"confidence":65,"support_request":0},"age_days":717,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-09-25T16:53:59+00:00","updated_at":"2025-05-23T17:26:55+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":40,"support_request":0,"confidence":65,"impact":45,"quick_win":27.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":40677,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"6331","title":"docs: truncated sentence","author":"CAD97","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/6331","summary":"Truncated sentence in About Parts documentation due to incorrect include start-line in docs/explanation/parts.rst","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"No maintainer has responded or labeled this issue yet. The bug is clear: docs/explanation/parts.rst includes from craft-parts at start-line 6, cutting off the beginning of the sentence 'A *part* is a description...'. The fix is changing start-line 6 to 5.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":55,"complexity":10,"confidence":80,"support_request":0},"age_days":65,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-07-09T19:55:21+00:00","updated_at":"2026-07-14T12:55:15+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":10,"support_request":0,"confidence":80,"impact":20,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":6911,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"4967","title":"Deprecate `snapcraft pack <directory>`","author":"mr-cal","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/4967","summary":"Cleanup task to add a deprecation notice for `snapcraft pack <directory>`, recommending `snap pack <directory>` instead, ahead of removal in a major release. Triaged with a Jira ticket (CRAFT-3233); the notice is not yet in the code.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is triaged (Status: Triaged, Type: Cleanup), authored by maintainer mr-cal, and has an internal Jira ticket (CRAFT-3233), so it is acknowledged and valid. I verified the current PackCommand in snapcraft/commands/lifecycle.py still packs a directory via pack_snap with no deprecation notice, so the work is genuinely outstanding and the command is still relevant. It is a scoped cleanup, not stale or irrelevant, so it should stay open.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":16.25,"staleness":55,"complexity":35,"confidence":75,"support_request":0},"age_days":759,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Cleanup"],"created_at":"2024-08-14T16:06:46+00:00","updated_at":"2026-01-28T18:36:57+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":35,"support_request":0,"confidence":75,"impact":25,"quick_win":16.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":16297,"project_name":"starflow","source":"github","external_id":"85","title":"Create a workflow for testing dev environments","author":"mr-cal","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/starflow/issues/85","summary":"Enhancement to add a test-dev-environment.yaml GitHub workflow running make setup/lint/format/test/docs in clean LXD environments across a distro/arch matrix, plus a self-test workflow for starbase. Triaged and open; last activity 201 days ago noted a ty versioning edge case in make setup.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is labelled Status: Triaged and Type: Enhancement, authored by a maintainer (mr-cal), and was still being actively discussed 201 days ago when @PraaneshSelvaraj reported a related edge case (ty versioning during make setup) while working on craft-providers. It is a scoped, valid enhancement with no evidence it has been implemented or superseded, so it should remain open.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":20.25,"staleness":55,"complexity":55,"confidence":55,"support_request":5},"age_days":373,"labels":["Type: Enhancement","Status: Triaged"],"created_at":"2025-09-04T12:22:28+00:00","updated_at":"2026-02-11T18:29:58+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":55,"support_request":5,"confidence":55,"impact":45,"quick_win":20.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":7017,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"4861","title":"Enrich `CraftErrors` with resolutions and documentation links","author":"mr-cal","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/4861","summary":"Enhancement to enrich existing CraftError instances across craft-cli with resolution, docs_url, and details fields for better error UX. Triaged by maintainer, no active work in ~7 months.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is labeled 'Status: Triaged' and 'Type: Enhancement', created by maintainer mr-cal. The base CraftError class already supports details/resolution/docs_url/doc_slug fields (confirmed in craft_cli/errors.py), but the task of populating these across all existing error sites remains incomplete. Last activity was 215 days ago (Jira sync bot), with no PRs or commits addressing it, but the enhancement is still valid and scoped.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":19.25,"staleness":55,"complexity":45,"confidence":72,"support_request":5},"age_days":816,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2024-06-18T19:08:37+00:00","updated_at":"2026-01-28T18:35:58+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":45,"support_request":5,"confidence":72,"impact":35,"quick_win":19.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":2229,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"1900","title":"Charm plugin can include unexpected files","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/1900","summary":"Charm plugin packs all files from the project directory, unlike 2.x which filtered to known items, risking inclusion of sensitive files like .envrc. Maintainer opened it with mitigation ideas; Batalex confirmed subfolder hidden files are included. Unresolved, no fix in current code.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is a genuine bug with security implications (Batalex notes sensitive files like .envrc can be packed), and the current _charm.py still copies the entire source directory with no filtering. It was triaged by maintainers (lengau, Batalex) with concrete mitigation ideas, but no fix has landed and the related issue #170 was closed as fixed for a different (2.x) code path, so it should remain open.","scores":{"impact":75,"quick_win":22.5,"staleness":55,"complexity":70,"confidence":70,"support_request":5},"age_days":729,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-09-13T15:48:49+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:18:11+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":70,"support_request":5,"confidence":70,"impact":75,"quick_win":22.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":41231,"project_name":"craft-platforms","source":"github","external_id":"254","title":"ci: add workshops","author":"lengau","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-platforms/pull/254","summary":"Adds workshop tool for local development and cross-version testing. 51 days inactive, 0 reviewers, 8 unresolved review comments, all CI passing.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"The PR adds workshop tooling for local dev and multi-version testing with all CI passing, but has been inactive for 51 days with 0 reviewer engagement and 8 unresolved review comments. No evidence the feature was implemented elsewhere or that the PR is irrelevant, so it needs maintainer review rather than closing.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":22.5,"staleness":55,"complexity":25,"confidence":70},"age_days":59,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-07-15T23:56:32+00:00","updated_at":"2026-07-16T00:00:59+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":25,"support_request":null,"confidence":70,"impact":30,"quick_win":22.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":4816,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"859","title":"Make python plugin integration tests work on non-LTS ubuntu series","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/859","summary":"Rockcraft python plugin integration test (tests/integration/plugins/test_python_plugin.py) only mapped LTS Ubuntu releases to expected values. Non-LTS (25.04/25.10) entries were later added via interim-base support; issue left open, unlabelled, no comments.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue's core ask is already implemented: the file's RELEASE_TO_VALUES now includes non-LTS '25.10' and '25.04' entries (added by 'feat: enable interim bases (#946)', 6ff0c6c0), and the test file has been actively maintained since (e.g. 'feat: use usrmerged install dirs for 25.10+', 'feat(project): add ubuntu@26.04 as a devel base (#1020)'). However, the issue is still open with no labels, comments, or maintainer acknowledgement, and the issue's secondary goal (non-LTS rock bases) is only partially addressed, so a maintainer should confirm and close it rather than auto-closing.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":19.5,"staleness":55,"complexity":35,"confidence":70,"support_request":0},"age_days":520,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-04-10T23:59:42+00:00","updated_at":"2025-04-11T16:14:47+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":35,"support_request":0,"confidence":70,"impact":30,"quick_win":19.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":2144,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"1985","title":"`--format json` ignored in 3.2.1","author":"PietroPasotti","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/1985","summary":"charmcraft pack --format json is silently ignored in 3.2.1; the flag is accepted but no JSON output is produced. Bug still present in current codebase (4.x) — the --format arg is defined in PackCommand but never handled in _run(). No maintainer response, no labels, 0 comments.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The bug is real and still present: PackCommand in lifecycle.py defines --format (line 94) but _run (lines 160-200) never checks parsed_args.format, unlike store.py, analyse.py, and extensions.py which all emit JSON when the flag is set. No maintainer has responded (0 comments, no labels, 658 days old), so this needs triage to confirm whether the feature should be implemented or the flag removed.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":31.5,"staleness":55,"complexity":30,"confidence":82,"support_request":5},"age_days":671,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-11-11T09:47:55+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:18:06+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":30,"support_request":5,"confidence":82,"impact":45,"quick_win":31.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":6841,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"5038","title":"Docs: Interactive builds loop","author":"medubelko","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/5038","summary":"sphinx-autobuild enters infinite rebuild loop when editing RST files in /docs. Triaged bug; upstream fix (starbase#496) merged into common.mk with --ignore flags. Likely resolved but not confirmed by reporter.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The upstream issue canonical/starbase#496 is closed and fixed in PR #523, which added --ignore flags for the venv and reference/commands directory. Those flags are now present in snapcraft's common.mk (line 11: SPHINX_AUTOBUILD_OPTS ?= --ignore \"$(DOCS_VENVDIR)/*\" --ignore \"reference/commands/*\"), meaning the root-cause fix has been merged. The issue has been open 717 days with last activity 164 days ago, and the reporter's final comment simply pointed to the now-resolved upstream issue.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":55,"complexity":40,"confidence":72,"support_request":10},"age_days":729,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Bug","Type: Documentation"],"created_at":"2024-09-13T17:59:26+00:00","updated_at":"2026-03-20T16:54:43+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":72,"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":2210,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"1919","title":"Charm venv shadows system python dependencies","author":"silverdrake11","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/1919","summary":"Charm venv on PYTHONPATH shadows system Python deps for subprocesses; maintainer confirmed it's an unavoidable side effect of the charm plugin, with new plugins using a dispatch file to activate the venv correctly in a future release.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer @lengau triaged and acknowledged the issue, explaining it's an unavoidable side effect of the charm plugin's PYTHONPATH-based venv simulation, but noted the next minor release would include new plugins using a dispatch file that activates the venv correctly. The repo confirms this work landed (commits #1899 adding Python/Poetry plugins, #2722 extension dispatch, and 7fa20644 ensuring bin/activate is included), but the legacy charm plugin still uses PYTHONPATH=lib:venv, so the issue remains relevant for existing charm-plugin users until they migrate.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":20.0,"staleness":55,"complexity":60,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":718,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-09-25T00:12:07+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:18:10+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":60,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":50,"quick_win":20.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":2176,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"1953","title":"Charmcraft 3 should still accept image digests for `upload-resource`","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/1953","summary":"Charmcraft 3 `upload-resource` rejects bare image digests (e.g. sha256:…) that charmcraft 2 accepted; the ImageService lacks a digest-based lookup via RepoDigests. Unlabeled, no maintainer response, only a bot Jira-sync comment.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is a real regression: charmcraft 3's `upload-resource` no longer accepts bare image digests (e.g. `sha256:583ddc…`) that charmcraft 2 supported via PR #871/#908. The current code in `store.py` falls through to the `else` branch because the regex `^[a-z-]+:` doesn't match `sha256:` (digits not in the character class), and `get_maybe_id_from_docker` only handles name/tag lookups, not digest-based lookups via `RepoDigests`. No maintainer has labeled, assigned, or responded to this issue — only an automated Jira-sync bot comment exists — so it needs triage.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":35.0,"staleness":55,"complexity":30,"confidence":72,"support_request":0},"age_days":702,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-10-10T16:30:24+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:18:07+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":30,"support_request":0,"confidence":72,"impact":50,"quick_win":35.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":2416,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"1713","title":"Autodocs: Updates for pydantic models","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/1713","summary":"Tracking issue for two action items: create a single charmcraft.yaml schema (done via PR #2183) and alphabetize schema items (not done). No labels, comments, or assignee; no activity for ~12.5 months.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"Action item 1 (single schema) was completed in PR #2183 which added tools/schema.py, schema/charmcraft.json, and a CI diff workflow, but action item 2 (alphabetize) shows no evidence of being addressed. The issue has no labels, no comments, no assignee, and no activity in 381 days, so it needs a maintainer to acknowledge the partial completion and decide whether to close or keep open for the remaining cosmetic work.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":17.0,"staleness":55,"complexity":15,"confidence":72,"support_request":0},"age_days":803,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-07-01T13:59:58+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:17:59+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":15,"support_request":0,"confidence":72,"impact":20,"quick_win":17.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29200,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1712808","title":"udev interface fails in privileged containers","author":"~saviq","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1712808","summary":"snapd fails to reload udev rules when installing snaps in privileged LXD containers (no udevd running). Fixed in snapd 2.68.5; verification done for noble/plucky/questing, jammy verification still pending.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The fix landed in snapd 2.68.5 (SRU bug 2098137) and the issue is actively triaged with verification labels: verification-done for noble, plucky, and questing, but verification-needed-jammy remains, so it must stay open until jammy is verified. Last activity was ~7 months ago, so it's moderately stale but clearly still relevant and not a candidate for closing.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"staleness":55,"complexity":40,"confidence":75,"support_request":10},"age_days":3306,"labels":["verification-done-noble","verification-done-plucky","verification-done-questing","verification-needed","verification-needed-jammy"],"created_at":"2017-08-24T12:09:36.343859+00:00","updated_at":"2026-01-19T11:28:46.512010+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":75,"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":12039,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"1035","title":"Fetch service external spread tests are failing","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/issues/1035","summary":"External fetch-service spread tests fail with apt 403 Forbidden; reporter says they should pass once Fetch Service 0.16 ships (fetch-service PRs 548/579). Test was temporarily disabled in CI by PR #1036.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The reporter (a maintainer) explicitly states the tests should succeed once Fetch Service 0.16 is released, citing fetch-service PRs 548 and 579, so this is a known, tracked external-dependency issue rather than a stale one. The test was only temporarily disabled in CI (commit 790ecaf5, PR #1036), so the underlying problem is still expected to be resolved and re-enabled, warranting keep_open.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":28.0,"staleness":55,"complexity":30,"confidence":70,"support_request":5},"age_days":178,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-03-18T16:27:25+00:00","updated_at":"2026-03-18T16:30:03+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":30,"support_request":5,"confidence":70,"impact":40,"quick_win":28.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":11850,"project_name":"debcraft","source":"github","external_id":"149","title":"[Feature] Add support for dpkg-buildflags for C/C++/Rust","author":"hector-cao","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/debcraft/issues/149","summary":"Feature request to automatically pass dpkg-buildflags (CFLAGS, CXXFLAGS, RUSTFLAGS, etc.) to the build environment. Triaged with Jira ticket DEBCRAFT-70. Code in lifecycle.py already implements this via _gen_dpkg_buildflags() added in PR #170.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is triaged (labeled Status: Triaged, Jira DEBCRAFT-70 created) and the core feature appears implemented in commit a0afaae (PR #170) which adds _gen_dpkg_buildflags() to lifecycle.py, passing all dpkg-buildflags output as build_environment. However, the issue remains open with no maintainer confirmation that PR #170 fully addresses the Rust-specific aspect, so it should stay open pending verification or explicit closure.","scores":{"impact":55,"quick_win":30.25,"staleness":55,"complexity":45,"confidence":75,"support_request":15},"age_days":138,"labels":["Status: Triaged"],"created_at":"2026-04-27T14:56:25+00:00","updated_at":"2026-05-22T16:30:09+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":45,"support_request":15,"confidence":75,"impact":55,"quick_win":30.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":12078,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"996","title":"RemoteBuild raises uncaught MissingSchema error","author":"mr-cal","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/issues/996","summary":"RemoteBuild crashes with uncaught MissingSchema when a build is cancelled in Launchpad UI, because fetch_logs tries to download a None build_log_url. Code now guards against empty URLs.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is triaged (labels Status: Triaged, Type: Bug) and filed by a maintainer, but the only comment is the Jira-sync bot (CRAFT-4994) with no human resolution. The current fetch_logs code already skips builds where build_log_url is falsy, which appears to address the crash, but I could not confirm via git history that this guard was added specifically to fix this issue, so it may still need verification/closure.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":31.5,"staleness":55,"complexity":30,"confidence":60,"support_request":5},"age_days":227,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Bug"],"created_at":"2026-01-28T18:29:05+00:00","updated_at":"2026-01-28T18:29:29+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":30,"support_request":5,"confidence":60,"impact":45,"quick_win":31.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":7155,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"4723","title":"Please always test against Fedora","author":"zyga","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/4723","summary":"Request to remove the manual flag from the fedora-39-64 spread system so Snapcraft integration tests run on Fedora. Triaged as an enhancement; a maintainer endorsed it in April 2025, but no fix has landed.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is triaged (labels: Status: Triaged, Type: Enhancement) and a maintainer (@mr-cal, 2025-04-24) explicitly endorsed it: \"This would be a significant improvement, we often have bugs with Snapcraft running on non-Ubuntu distros.\" The current spread.yaml backends still list only ubuntu systems (no fedora entry), so the request is unaddressed. Commit 7189d7901 \"ci: enable fedora in spread and scheduled gha\" touched spread.yaml, but the current tree shows no fedora backend, so the fix is not confirmed in HEAD.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":32.5,"staleness":55,"complexity":35,"confidence":70,"support_request":5},"age_days":885,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2024-04-10T16:16:50+00:00","updated_at":"2025-04-24T16:07:35+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":35,"support_request":5,"confidence":70,"impact":50,"quick_win":32.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":29130,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1669908","title":"Provide visible yaml settings or document organize plugin behavior for directory merging","author":"~dmitriis","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1669908","summary":"Request to document or expose a snapcraft.yaml knob for the organize plugin's directory-merging behavior, after a cryptic 'path ./ already exists' error from shutil.move when using '*' keys. No labels, no maintainer response, 0 comments; last activity 47 days ago on a ~9.5-year-old issue.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no assignee, and zero comments — no sign a maintainer has assessed it, so it needs triage. It is a documentation/UX request (make organize's directory-merge precedence visible) rather than a hard bug, and the reporter already found a workaround (avoiding '*'), which lowers urgency. The referenced code paths (snapcraft/internal/pluginhandler, file_utils.link_or_copy_tree) predate the current snapcraft/parts layout, so a triager should confirm whether the behavior still applies before deciding to document or close.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":16.5,"staleness":55,"complexity":45,"confidence":55,"support_request":35},"age_days":3480,"labels":[],"created_at":"2017-03-03T21:41:15.886508+00:00","updated_at":"2026-07-15T17:46:04.731172+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":45,"support_request":35,"confidence":55,"impact":30,"quick_win":16.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":11861,"project_name":"debcraft","source":"github","external_id":"138","title":"Support XSBC entries in the project file","author":"cmatsuoka","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/debcraft/issues/138","summary":"Feature request to support XSBC-prefixed custom fields in the project file, replacing the passthrough mechanism for binary package control entries. Triaged by maintainer, tracked as DEBCRAFT-65, no implementation yet.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is labeled 'Status: Triaged' and was filed by a maintainer (cmatsuoka) with a clear scope: replace the passthrough mechanism with XSBC-prefixed fields for binary package control entries. The internal Jira ticket DEBCRAFT-65 was created, confirming it is tracked. No implementation exists yet (no XSBC references in code), and the 129-day inactivity is moderate but the issue remains relevant as the passthrough mechanism is still the only way to add custom control fields.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":27.0,"staleness":55,"complexity":40,"confidence":70,"support_request":5},"age_days":141,"labels":["Status: Triaged"],"created_at":"2026-04-24T17:13:07+00:00","updated_at":"2026-04-24T17:13:19+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":40,"support_request":5,"confidence":70,"impact":45,"quick_win":27.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":5572,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"102","title":"Allow customization/removal of automatic \"go generate\" step","author":"tigarmo","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/102","summary":"GoPlugin always ran 'go generate ./...' causing build failures for chisel/pebble. Fixed upstream in craft-parts 1.15.0 (2022) via go-generate option (default empty). Maintainer assessed as resolved; awaiting reporter confirmation. Rockcraft requires craft-parts>=2.35.0.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The original problem (GoPlugin always calling 'go generate ./...') was fixed in craft-parts 1.15.0 which added the 'go-generate' key with an empty default. Current rockcraft requires craft-parts>=2.35.0. Maintainer @gcomneno confirmed on 2026-03-18 that the reported behavior no longer matches the current implementation and asked for confirmation, but the code evidence is conclusive.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":29.75,"staleness":55,"complexity":15,"confidence":85,"support_request":5},"age_days":1445,"labels":[],"created_at":"2022-09-28T19:05:18+00:00","updated_at":"2026-03-18T17:37:26+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":15,"support_request":5,"confidence":85,"impact":35,"quick_win":29.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":12071,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"1003","title":"docs: Add reference documentation for the RemoteBuildService","author":"lengau","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/pull/1003","summary":"Adds 121 lines of reference documentation for RemoteBuildService across 2 files. CI passing, no reviews or comments. Author is a maintainer. Service still exists in codebase; target docs file not yet in main.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"The PR is 179 days old with zero comments or reviews, but the project is active (recent commits through #1168 in docs/reference) and RemoteBuildService still exists in craft_application/services/remotebuild.py. The target docs file does not yet exist in main, so the PR is not superseded. It simply needs a maintainer to review and merge.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":22.5,"staleness":55,"complexity":10,"confidence":78},"age_days":226,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-01-30T00:20:12+00:00","updated_at":"2026-03-05T18:55:15+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":10,"support_request":null,"confidence":78,"impact":25,"quick_win":22.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":12825,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"248","title":"remote build: If a build with the given name already exists, ask the user whether to recover it or cancel it.","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/issues/248","summary":"Enhancement: when starting a remote build whose name already exists, prompt the user to recover or cancel-and-recreate instead of erroring. Triaged by a maintainer; last activity 215 days ago, no fix in code yet.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is labelled Status: Triaged and Type: Enhancement, and was filed by a maintainer (lengau) with a linked internal ticket (CRAFT-2557), so it has been assessed and acknowledged. The code still errors out on an existing build name (no recover/cancel prompt in remote.py or remotebuild.py), so it remains applicable and should stay open.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":22.0,"staleness":55,"complexity":45,"confidence":70,"support_request":0},"age_days":928,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2024-02-27T22:25:41+00:00","updated_at":"2026-01-28T18:33:23+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":45,"support_request":0,"confidence":70,"impact":40,"quick_win":22.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":21599,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1490","title":"Fallback once to `snap download` if snap not found in global store","author":"soumyaDghosh","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/1490","summary":"Feature request to make craft-parts fall back to `snap download` when `snap install` fails because a snap is not in the global store, enabling private/dedicated snap stores. Unlabelled, zero comments, no maintainer response in ~6 months; code in craft_parts/packages/snaps.py still has no such fallback.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"No labels, no comments, no assignee, and no maintainer interaction for 177 days, so it has never been triaged. The request is still technically valid: craft_parts/packages/snaps.py install() only runs `snap install` and raises SnapInstallError on failure, with no fallback to `snap download` (which exists as a separate method), so the feature is unimplemented. It is a niche feature for private-store users rather than a bug, so it should be kept open pending maintainer prioritization rather than closed.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":19.25,"staleness":55,"complexity":45,"confidence":80,"support_request":20},"age_days":189,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-03-07T14:26:30+00:00","updated_at":"2026-03-07T14:27:13+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":45,"support_request":20,"confidence":80,"impact":35,"quick_win":19.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":2461,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"1668","title":"Update command docs for the unification of charmcraft.yaml","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/1668","summary":"Doc task to update command help text referencing metadata.yaml to charmcraft.yaml. Partially addressed in code (some commands updated, CreateLibCommand and ListLibCommand still say metadata.yaml). No labels, no maintainer response beyond Jira bot, last activity 381 days ago.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Filed by maintainer lengau and partially addressed in the codebase (e.g. fetch-lib and fetch-lib-libs now reference charmcraft.yaml, but CreateLibCommand overview at store.py:1275 and ListLibCommand help at store.py:1815/1828 still say metadata.yaml). The remaining references are still inaccurate since the project file is now charmcraft.yaml, so the issue remains valid and actionable.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":26.25,"staleness":55,"complexity":25,"confidence":72,"support_request":0},"age_days":870,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-04-25T14:01:07+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:18:02+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":25,"support_request":0,"confidence":72,"impact":35,"quick_win":26.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":15458,"project_name":"craft-actions","source":"github","external_id":"54","title":"\"snapcraft/test\" action","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-actions/issues/54","summary":"Feature request for a dedicated snapcraft/test GitHub Action with extra parameters and residual artifact outputs. Triaged by maintainer, tracked as CRAFT-5032, no implementation started. Pack action has a basic test flag but no dedicated test action exists.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is labeled Status: Triaged with an internal Jira ticket (CRAFT-5032), indicating maintainer acknowledgement. The repo remains active (recent PRs #97, #93, #100) and no implementation exists yet — the repo layout shows no snapcraft/test directory and no residual artifact support. The pack action's existing test flag (runTests in CraftBuilder) only runs snapcraft test without extra parameters or residual artifact outputs, so the feature request remains valid and unaddressed.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":22.5,"staleness":55,"complexity":50,"confidence":80,"support_request":5},"age_days":198,"labels":["Type: Enhancement","Status: Triaged"],"created_at":"2026-02-26T16:48:01+00:00","updated_at":"2026-02-26T16:48:40+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":50,"support_request":5,"confidence":80,"impact":45,"quick_win":22.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":2132,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"1997","title":"Add ability to `charmcraft close` not supported base.","author":"taurus-forever","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/1997","summary":"Feature request to extend `charmcraft close` to close a specific base within a track/risk/branch, not just the whole channel. Q2 about re-appearing bases after close/re-release was answered and confirmed by the reporter.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer @lengau acknowledged the request and filed a dependent store-side bug (snapstore-server bug 2088469) on 2024-11-18, and @milos-lukic answered Q2, which the reporter confirmed. The core feature (per-base close) is still not implemented in CloseCommand (store.py only accepts [track/]risk[/branch]), and depends on the external store API, so it remains a valid, triaged open feature request.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":20.25,"staleness":55,"complexity":55,"confidence":70,"support_request":15},"age_days":663,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-11-18T11:58:47+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:17:39+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":55,"support_request":15,"confidence":70,"impact":45,"quick_win":20.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":13471,"project_name":"craft-cli","source":"github","external_id":"269","title":"CraftError messages with new lines render inconsistently","author":"mr-cal","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-cli/issues/269","summary":"CraftError messages containing new lines render with extraneous whitespace between the message and resolution sections. A maintainer commented that PR #210 (remove trailing spaces) likely fixes this indirectly.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"A maintainer (lengau) acknowledged the bug on 2024-08-28 and indicated that PR #210 ('fix: remove trailing spaces where supported', merged) likely fixes this indirectly since it no longer uses spaces to fill the line. The issue has been triaged with a maintainer response and a linked fix, so it should remain open pending verification that the fix actually resolves the rendering inconsistency.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":22.5,"staleness":55,"complexity":25,"confidence":70,"support_request":5},"age_days":746,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-08-27T21:44:03+00:00","updated_at":"2025-03-10T18:58:51+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":25,"support_request":5,"confidence":70,"impact":30,"quick_win":22.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":21723,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1362","title":"stage filter not applied to overlay content","author":"upils","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/1362","summary":"craft-parts enhancement: apply the part's stage filter to content migrated from the overlay into the stage directory, using (overlay) prefixes. Triaged by maintainers as a new feature, but no implementation or assignee after ~9 months.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainers upils and tigarmo actively discussed and agreed on the approach on 2025-10-13: support (overlay)/ entries in the stage key to filter content migrated from the overlay into the stage dir, without changing overlay content. The issue is labelled Status: Triaged / Type: Enhancement, so it is triaged and valid, but no PR or assignee has been linked, so it should remain open for scheduling rather than be closed.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":22.5,"staleness":55,"complexity":55,"confidence":80,"support_request":5},"age_days":337,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2025-10-10T14:31:39+00:00","updated_at":"2025-10-14T12:20:51+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":55,"support_request":5,"confidence":80,"impact":50,"quick_win":22.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":2150,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"1979","title":"`charmcraft upload` should allow a user to also release the charm","author":"lucabello","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/1979","summary":"Feature request to add --release flag to charmcraft upload command. The --release flag is already implemented (PR #255), but auto-uploading resources from upstream-image field in charmcraft.yaml remains unimplemented. Last activity Feb 2025.","suggested_action":"close_not_a_bug","suggested_action_reason":"The primary feature requested (adding --release flag to upload command) is already implemented in PR #255 and visible in current code (store.py line 587) and docs (manage-the-current-charmhub-user.rst line 128). The remaining auto-resource-upload from upstream-image field is a separate feature that should be tracked as its own issue.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":24.0,"staleness":55,"complexity":40,"confidence":75,"support_request":10},"age_days":681,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-10-31T14:40:50+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:17:53+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":75,"impact":40,"quick_win":24.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":12832,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"241","title":"Launchpad: Handle invalid credentials files better","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/issues/241","summary":"Enhancement to catch configparser errors from invalid Launchpad credentials files and retry login after deleting the file. Triaged by maintainer 2.5 years ago; code in launchpad.py still has no such handling. Inactive for ~7 months.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is labeled 'Status: Triaged' and 'Type: Enhancement', the problem is still present in craft_application/launchpad/launchpad.py (no NoOptionError handling found via grep or code inspection), and the last activity was 215 days ago. It remains a valid, scoped enhancement that simply hasn't been picked up yet, so it should stay open rather than be closed as stale.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":24.5,"staleness":55,"complexity":30,"confidence":75,"support_request":5},"age_days":929,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2024-02-26T18:04:31+00:00","updated_at":"2026-01-28T18:32:47+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":30,"support_request":5,"confidence":75,"impact":35,"quick_win":24.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":5903,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"6017","title":"XKB_CONFIG_ROOT pointing to non-existent directory in kde-neon-6/kde-neon-qt6","author":"RealLucioCarreras","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/6017","summary":"kde-neon-qt6 extension sets XKB_CONFIG_ROOT to $SNAP/qt6/usr/share/X11/xkb which does not exist in the kde-qt6-core24 content snap, causing xkbcommon errors and segfaults. No maintainer response in 207 days.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"Well-written bug report with strace evidence and a working workaround, but zero labels, zero comments, and no maintainer interaction in 207 days. The code at extensions/desktop/common/desktop-exports:78 unconditionally exports XKB_CONFIG_ROOT to a path the content snap does not ship, and no recent commit addresses this.","scores":{"impact":55,"quick_win":35.75,"staleness":55,"complexity":35,"confidence":78,"support_request":10},"age_days":219,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-02-05T16:18:15+00:00","updated_at":"2026-02-05T16:18:15+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":35,"support_request":10,"confidence":78,"impact":55,"quick_win":35.75,"has_related_links":false},{"id":12106,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"967","title":"feat: craft testing backend for lp-test","author":"cmatsuoka","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/pull/967","summary":"Adds an lp-test backend to the craft testing service (testcraft) for running tests against Launchpad. 311/25 lines across 4 files. CI green, but 11 unresolved review comments and no approvals; last activity was a maintainer asking if it still needs review (203 days ago).","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"The PR is 270 days old with 11 unresolved review comments and 0 approvals, but the author is a maintainer and the last activity (2026-01-20) was a maintainer asking whether it still needs review — indicating it is still considered relevant, not dead. CI is fully passing and the testcraft/testing service still exists in the repo, so it is not stale-irrelevant; it simply needs a maintainer to resolve the open review comments and land it.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":22.0,"staleness":55,"complexity":45,"confidence":60},"age_days":282,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-12-04T18:20:28+00:00","updated_at":"2026-02-09T12:00:11+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":45,"support_request":null,"confidence":60,"impact":40,"quick_win":22.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":2111,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2018","title":"Package service integration tests fail on non-amd64 architectures","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/2018","summary":"Package service integration tests hardcode amd64, causing failures on arm64 CI. Still open; QA workflow limits tests to amd64 as a workaround referencing this issue. No fix merged yet.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The QA workflow (.github/workflows/qa.yaml) explicitly references this issue as the reason for limiting tests to amd64: 'Limiting to amd64 is a workaround for https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/2018. Once that's resolved we should run fast and slow tests on ARM64 Ubuntu too.' This is a maintainer acknowledgement that the issue is valid and still relevant, and the failing tests in tests/integration/services/test_package.py still exist. It is a genuine test-infrastructure bug, not a support request, and remains unresolved.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":21.0,"staleness":55,"complexity":40,"confidence":78,"support_request":5},"age_days":645,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-12-06T20:39:00+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:18:02+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":40,"support_request":5,"confidence":78,"impact":35,"quick_win":21.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":11942,"project_name":"debcraft","source":"github","external_id":"57","title":"test: unit tests for lifecycle service","author":"Copilot","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/debcraft/pull/57","summary":"Adds unit tests for the Lifecycle service (prime_dirs, get_prime_dir, partition-to-package mapping) per review feedback on #54. Merged main in Dec 2025 to resolve conflicts; CI mostly green but Conventional Commits and lint checks still failing. No maintainer review yet.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer lengau actively drove this PR through rebase and conflict resolution (Dec 2025), and Copilot fixed the lint issue in commit 975c0e4, but the Conventional Commits and lint CI checks are still failing and no maintainer has reviewed or approved. The PR needs a maintainer to verify the fixes and land it, per cmatsuoka's note that it can land directly on main after #54.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":21.25,"staleness":55,"complexity":15,"confidence":70},"age_days":288,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-11-28T13:46:54+00:00","updated_at":"2025-12-08T17:04:22+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":true,"staleness":55,"complexity":15,"support_request":null,"confidence":70,"impact":25,"quick_win":21.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":13672,"project_name":"craft-cli","source":"github","external_id":"68","title":"Better output information when requesting help for a command with bad arguments for that command","author":"facundobatista","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-cli/issues/68","summary":"craft-cli help command errors with 'Too many parameters' when given a valid command name plus an invalid option (e.g. `charmcraft help close --bad-args`); it should show help for the named command. Still unfixed in current code; no maintainer triage, only a Jira-sync bot comment.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is unlabelled with no maintainer response (only the syncronize-issues-to-jira bot created CRAFT-3415), so it has not been triaged. I verified the behavior is still present: `_get_requested_help` in craft_cli/dispatcher.py (~line 375) still raises 'Too many parameters when requesting help' for extra positional args, and tests/unit/test_help.py::test_tool_exec_help_on_too_many_things explicitly encodes the current erroring behavior, so it is not fixed and should stay open pending triage.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":15.0,"staleness":55,"complexity":40,"confidence":85,"support_request":5},"age_days":1650,"labels":[],"created_at":"2022-03-07T14:53:21+00:00","updated_at":"2025-03-10T18:59:13+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":40,"support_request":5,"confidence":85,"impact":25,"quick_win":15.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":12148,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"926","title":"The `adopt_info` field should be checked to reference a valid part.","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/issues/926","summary":"Bug: the adopt-info field accepts any string without verifying it references an existing part in the project. Triaged by a maintainer (lengau) with a Jira ticket (CRAFT-4818) created, but no fix has landed; the field is still a plain str with no validator in the current code.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is labelled Status: Triaged and Type: Bug, authored by a maintainer, with an internal Jira ticket (CRAFT-4818) created on 2025-09-30, so it has been assessed and is not stale or a support request. The current code still declares adopt_info as a plain str | None with no validator checking the referenced part exists, and the earlier adopt-info validation work (PR #227) was reverted, so the bug remains unfixed and should stay open.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"staleness":55,"complexity":40,"confidence":70,"support_request":5},"age_days":347,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Bug"],"created_at":"2025-09-30T15:56:03+00:00","updated_at":"2025-09-30T15:56:35+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":40,"support_request":5,"confidence":70,"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":21837,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1248","title":"poetry plugin: Support `disable-parallel` parameter","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/1248","summary":"Enhancement to support the disable-parallel part property in the poetry plugin. Triaged as 'Needs information'; maintainer deferred it pending the python plugin's disable-parallel decision (#1247), and no real-world use case has been provided.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The maintainer (lengau) explicitly triaged this with 'Status: Needs information' and commented on 2025-09-02 that the python plugin decision in #1247 must be resolved first, and #1247 is still open with an active proposed three-state implementation. The poetry plugin code confirms no disable-parallel support exists yet, so the issue remains valid and is blocked on that upstream decision rather than stale or irrelevant.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":9.75,"staleness":55,"complexity":35,"confidence":80,"support_request":10},"age_days":375,"labels":["Type: Enhancement","Status: Needs information"],"created_at":"2025-09-02T15:27:03+00:00","updated_at":"2025-09-02T15:34:34+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":35,"support_request":10,"confidence":80,"impact":15,"quick_win":9.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":12253,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"821","title":"5.5.0 changes pack semantics if the project file has different metadata","author":"javierdelapuente","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/issues/821","summary":"Charmcraft pack skips repacking when only charmcraft.yaml metadata (e.g. summary, config, platforms) changes, leaving a stale .charm. Triaged and moved to craft-application; workaround is clean. Conditional repacking support added in #1111.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer lengau triaged it (Status: Triaged, Type: Bug), moved it to craft-application, and noted a testcraft spread test should be added when fixed. The root cause is in craft-application's pack-skip logic (needs_packing in services/package.py), where metadata-only changes to the project file are not detected as requiring a repack. Related work #1111 (conditional repacking) and #829 (gate around skipping repack) show active development in this area, but no commit explicitly closes this issue.","scores":{"impact":60,"quick_win":27.0,"staleness":55,"complexity":55,"confidence":70,"support_request":5},"age_days":415,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Bug"],"created_at":"2025-07-24T10:57:18+00:00","updated_at":"2025-07-28T16:37:34+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":55,"support_request":5,"confidence":70,"impact":60,"quick_win":27.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":12268,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"806","title":"Use `snapcraft test` for spread tests","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/issues/806","summary":"Dogfooding task to switch craft-application CI from running spread directly to using snapcraft test. Triaged; open PR #1038 stalled ~165 days with failing CI; workflow still runs spread directly at HEAD.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is triaged (Status: Triaged label) and still applicable: at HEAD, .github/workflows/spread.yaml still runs `spread` directly rather than `snapcraft test`. Open PR #1038 directly implements it but has sat 165 days with 0 reviews and failing craft-test CI, and merged #1168 deprecated spread.yaml in favor of <app-name>-test.yaml, so the PR needs a refresh rather than closure.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":13.75,"staleness":55,"complexity":45,"confidence":80,"support_request":0},"age_days":430,"labels":["Status: Triaged"],"created_at":"2025-07-09T20:51:26+00:00","updated_at":"2026-03-19T14:41:16+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":45,"support_request":0,"confidence":80,"impact":25,"quick_win":13.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":40581,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"2160018","title":"Snapcraft 9.0.0: cannot create directory '/snap/command-chain': Permission denied","author":"~nteodosio","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2160018","summary":"Snapcraft 9.0.0 regression: Docker destructive mode builds fail with permission denied when creating /snap/command-chain. Unlabelled, no maintainer response after 60 days.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"This is a well-structured bug report with clear reproduction steps and a regression indicator (8.x works, 9.0.0 fails), but it has zero comments, no labels, and no maintainer engagement after 60 days. Per guidelines, unlabelled issues with no maintainer response need triage before any action. The issue affects Docker destructive mode builds which could have broad impact.","scores":{"impact":65,"quick_win":35.75,"staleness":55,"complexity":45,"confidence":55,"support_request":15},"age_days":68,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-07-07T09:24:19.765125+00:00","updated_at":"2026-07-07T12:26:29.053421+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":45,"support_request":15,"confidence":55,"impact":65,"quick_win":35.75,"has_related_links":false},{"id":12772,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"301","title":"Smarter docs URL handling","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/issues/301","summary":"Feature request to make docs URL handling smarter: when an error carries a docs slug, match it against the application's docs base URL so libraries can raise exceptions without the app catching/reraising them with a full docs URL. Tracked internally as CRAFT-2704; no maintainer response yet.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no assignee, and the only comment is an automated Jira-sync bot message (CRAFT-2704) — no maintainer has acknowledged, categorised, or responded to it. The body itself notes it 'will probably initially need to be a spike', so it is an unassessed feature request that needs triage. The codebase already has partial infrastructure (doc_slug on errors, render_doc_url, docs_base_url on the dispatcher), suggesting the work is partially underway but not tied to this issue.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":27.0,"staleness":55,"complexity":40,"confidence":55,"support_request":10},"age_days":890,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-04-05T16:21:49+00:00","updated_at":"2025-05-23T17:26:58+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":55,"impact":45,"quick_win":27.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":5341,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"334","title":"Declaring ca-certificates in stage-packages doesn't populate the /etc/ssl/certs directory","author":"weiiwang01","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/334","summary":"stage-packages ca-certificates leaves /etc/ssl/certs empty because maintainer scripts don't run; overlay-packages works. Maintainers confirmed it's expected behavior and a doc note was added to backlog (ROCKS-1696) in Nov 2024. Awaiting docs update.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Multiple maintainers (cjdcordeiro, jnsgruk, sergiusens, dboddie) triaged this and confirmed the behavior is expected — stage-packages doesn't run maintainer scripts, so ca-certificates' postinst that creates /etc/ssl/certs symlinks never runs. The reporter confirmed overlay-packages works. In Nov 2024 cjdcordeiro added it to backlog (ROCKS-1696) and committed to a doc note, so the issue is triaged, valid, and has an agreed resolution path (documentation), warranting keep_open.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":28.0,"staleness":55,"complexity":30,"confidence":72,"support_request":55},"age_days":1144,"labels":[],"created_at":"2023-07-26T10:33:50+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:12:46+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":30,"support_request":55,"confidence":72,"impact":40,"quick_win":28.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":12660,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"413","title":"Create a common documentation folder","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/issues/413","summary":"Request to create a common documentation folder (like craft-parts) for docs reusable across applications. The docs/common folder now exists with reusable docs and is referenced in CONTRIBUTING.md, so the core ask appears implemented.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The docs/common directory exists with 8 files and CONTRIBUTING.md (lines 267-268) explicitly points contributors to place shared downstream-app docs there, indicating the core request was implemented. However, the referenced env-vars doc (#412) was closed without implementation, so the specific motivating example may still be unaddressed; a maintainer should confirm whether the folder's current state fully satisfies the issue before closing.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":32.0,"staleness":55,"complexity":20,"confidence":70,"support_request":0},"age_days":761,"labels":["Type: Enhancement","Type: Documentation"],"created_at":"2024-08-12T17:13:40+00:00","updated_at":"2025-09-03T19:08:10+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":20,"support_request":0,"confidence":70,"impact":40,"quick_win":32.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":5382,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"293","title":"Improve reference docs for rockcraft commands","author":"tigarmo","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/293","summary":"Request to improve bare-bones Rockcraft command reference docs; addressed by PR #318 which automated CLI reference doc generation via gen_cli_docs.py","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"PR #318 'docs: automate CLI reference documentation' implemented the requested improvement by creating tools/docs/gen_cli_docs.py which generates structured reference pages from command definitions. The docs/reference/commands.rst file now includes auto-generated lifecycle, extensions, and other command references, directly addressing the 'bare-bones' concern raised in the issue.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":27.0,"staleness":55,"complexity":40,"confidence":75,"support_request":10},"age_days":1198,"labels":["Type: Documentation"],"created_at":"2023-06-02T12:55:54+00:00","updated_at":"2025-12-11T15:28:17+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":75,"impact":45,"quick_win":27.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":6468,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"5411","title":"Fail to fetch packages for non-host architecture","author":"joulsen","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/5411","summary":"Cross-compile (amd64 build-on, arm64 build-for) fails to fetch stage-packages with :arm64 suffix (e.g. ros-jazzy-ros-base) even though present in repo; maintainer reproduced apt unmet-deps on arch-All python deps; reporter suspects ROS2 repo, not snapcraft. Awaiting reporter's working dpkg repro.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer mr-cal actively engaged (reproduced the apt unmet-dependency error, confirmed arch-All python deps, and on 2025-04-21 asked the reporter for a working dpkg repro to determine what snapcraft must replicate). The reporter responded 2025-04-23 that they could not produce such an environment and suspects the ROS2 repo itself. The issue is triaged, acknowledged, and blocked on external info from the reporter, so it should stay open rather than be closed as stale.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":12.0,"staleness":55,"complexity":70,"confidence":55,"support_request":30},"age_days":515,"labels":["Type: Question"],"created_at":"2025-04-16T06:52:19+00:00","updated_at":"2025-04-29T16:52:39+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":70,"support_request":30,"confidence":55,"impact":40,"quick_win":12.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":15465,"project_name":"craft-actions","source":"github","external_id":"47","title":"Docs: link to examples in each action's README","author":"jahn-junior","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-actions/issues/47","summary":"Docs enhancement to add real-world usage examples to each action's README (setup, pack) to help users disambiguate between them. Labeled Type: Documentation, filed by a maintainer, no comments or PRs referencing it in 263 days.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is triaged (labeled Type: Documentation), filed by maintainer jahn-junior, and the documentation gap it describes still exists — grep confirms no 'Examples' section in any action README. The repo remains active (recent commits #100, #101), so the issue is not outdated. Inactivity alone (~8.5 months) is insufficient to close a valid, scoped doc improvement.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":24.0,"staleness":55,"complexity":20,"confidence":75,"support_request":10},"age_days":275,"labels":["Type: Documentation"],"created_at":"2025-12-11T17:43:59+00:00","updated_at":"2025-12-11T17:43:59+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":20,"support_request":10,"confidence":75,"impact":30,"quick_win":24.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":5895,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"6025","title":"Snapcraft ignores SNAPCRAFT_BUILD_ENVIRONMENT_* environment variables on MacOS","author":"pachulo","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/6025","summary":"SNAPCRAFT_BUILD_ENVIRONMENT_CPU/MEMORY env vars documented for Multipass VM sizing are ignored on macOS; maintainer confirmed values are hardcoded, fix blocked by upstream craft-providers#531 (open 2+ years). Triaged as enhancement, no progress since Feb 2026.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer @mr-cal explicitly confirmed the limitation ('CPU and memory for Multipass is hardcoded without a workaround') and pointed to upstream craft-providers#531 as the blocking task. The issue is triaged, valid, and blocked by an external dependency that remains open, so it should stay open until that work lands. The docs at set-up-snapcraft.rst:147-148 also need updating to clarify the macOS limitation.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":24.75,"staleness":55,"complexity":45,"confidence":82,"support_request":25},"age_days":215,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2026-02-10T01:58:38+00:00","updated_at":"2026-02-12T20:53:48+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":45,"support_request":25,"confidence":82,"impact":45,"quick_win":24.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":13059,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"99","title":"Means to reduce duplication of plugin fields","author":"sed-i","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/issues/99","summary":"Feature request for a top-level 'definitions' section in craft app YAML to reduce duplication of recurring repo/source fields via anchors. Transferred to craft-application; maintainer sought opinion on approach (similar to grammar changes) in March 2024, no resolution since.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer @lengau explicitly acknowledged the request ('interesting idea') and transferred it to craft-application, then in March 2024 asked @cmatsuoka for an opinion, noting it would be 'fairly similar to the grammar related changes' — so it is triaged and under consideration, not stale-dead. No implementation found in the codebase (no 'definitions' top-level field, no YAML anchor support), and the last activity (465 days ago) is a maintainer question awaiting a response, so it should remain open pending that decision.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":12.25,"staleness":55,"complexity":65,"confidence":60,"support_request":10},"age_days":1199,"labels":[],"created_at":"2023-06-01T18:43:41+00:00","updated_at":"2025-05-23T17:27:07+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":65,"support_request":10,"confidence":60,"impact":35,"quick_win":12.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":5047,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"628","title":"Improve article \"Parts and Steps\"","author":"hd9","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/628","summary":"Request to clarify two ambiguous terms in the rockcraft 'Parts and Steps' reference doc: link 'craft-parts' to the Parts concept and define 'project'. Doc still contains the same generic wording; no maintainer response in 788 days.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has a 'Type: Documentation' label but zero maintainer comments, no assignee, and no indication of prioritization. The underlying doc (shared from craft-parts repo via include) still reads 'Parts and steps define the lifecycle of a project' with no link to the Parts explanation page, confirming the reported ambiguity persists. The request is well-scoped and actionable but has not been assessed by a maintainer.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":22.5,"staleness":55,"complexity":25,"confidence":75,"support_request":15},"age_days":800,"labels":["Type: Documentation"],"created_at":"2024-07-05T01:23:30+00:00","updated_at":"2025-12-11T15:13:26+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":25,"support_request":15,"confidence":75,"impact":30,"quick_win":22.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":5489,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"185","title":"Support for descriptors different from rockcraft.yaml","author":"arturo-seijas","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/185","summary":"Feature request to allow custom descriptor filenames beyond rockcraft.yaml for multi-rock repos. Maintainer declined on 2025-10-01 citing cross-craft-tool consistency; workaround via rocks-template suggested. Issue remains open, last activity 328 days ago.","suggested_action":"close_not_a_bug","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer @tigarmo explicitly stated on 2025-10-01: 'There are no current plans to address this as we want to keep the behavior consistent among the craft tools (eg Snapcraft and Charmcraft),' confirming the rockcraft.yaml-only limitation is intentional by design. @cjdcordeiro also provided a concrete workaround (rocks-template) for the multi-rock use case, making the feature request moot.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":11.0,"staleness":55,"complexity":45,"confidence":80,"support_request":25},"age_days":1314,"labels":[],"created_at":"2023-02-06T16:47:08+00:00","updated_at":"2025-10-07T09:38:25+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":45,"support_request":25,"confidence":80,"impact":20,"quick_win":11.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":7549,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"4328","title":"Hard to see what the causes an error for a 404 network error","author":"sergiusens","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/4328","summary":"Enhancement: 404 network errors during source pull don't identify which part/source failed. Triaged by maintainer, synced to Jira SNAPCRAFT-1086. craft-parts NetworkRequestError now includes a source detail field.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is triaged (Status: Triaged, Type: Enhancement labels) and synced to internal Jira SNAPCRAFT-1086, indicating active tracking. The underlying craft-parts NetworkRequestError now includes a source detail field (craft_parts/sources/errors.py), but it's unclear whether snapcraft surfaces this in its brief output or whether the 404 case specifically passes the source. No PR has closed this issue, so it should remain open pending verification.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":28.0,"staleness":55,"complexity":30,"confidence":60,"support_request":10},"age_days":1121,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2023-08-18T12:24:40+00:00","updated_at":"2025-04-24T14:26:25+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":30,"support_request":10,"confidence":60,"impact":40,"quick_win":28.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":12083,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"991","title":"Add a prune-instances command","author":"mr-cal","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/issues/991","summary":"Feature request for a prune-instances command in craft-application to remove non-base provider instances, with optional provider flags and tests. Unimplemented; blocked on craft-providers work; still needed by charmcraft#1042.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"This is a maintainer-filed, labelled enhancement (Type: Enhancement) that is clearly scoped and still relevant: no 'prune' command exists in the codebase (only ProviderService.clean_instances for project-scoped cleanup), and the dependent consumer charmcraft#1042 is confirmed still open. The issue explicitly requires craft-providers#639 and #893, so it is blocked on external work rather than abandoned; inactivity alone (~7 months, 0 comments) does not make it irrelevant.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":24.75,"staleness":55,"complexity":45,"confidence":75,"support_request":0},"age_days":234,"labels":["Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2026-01-21T20:08:33+00:00","updated_at":"2026-02-11T15:09:49+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":45,"support_request":0,"confidence":75,"impact":45,"quick_win":24.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":6777,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"5102","title":"Unable to set components version using craftctl set version","author":"stephensp","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/5102","summary":"Request to allow dynamically setting component versions via craftctl during override-build (currently errors with 'variable version can be set only once'). Triaged as enhancement; spec'd and prototyped in 2025 but unscheduled. Feature now implemented in snapcraft 8.13 via craftctl set components.<name>.version.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The requested capability has been implemented: snapcraft 8.13 release notes state 'Parts can now set a component versions dynamically... the part can call craftctl to set the version', and spread tests (tests/spread/_common/components/snapcraft.yaml) exercise exactly the proposed syntax `craftctl set components.share.version=\"2.0-updated\"` (lengau's suggestion from the issue). The issue is 692 days old with last activity 494 days ago and was explicitly noted as unscheduled, so the original problem is no longer reproducible on current versions.","scores":{"impact":55,"quick_win":22.0,"staleness":55,"complexity":60,"confidence":80,"support_request":10},"age_days":705,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2024-10-08T05:58:55+00:00","updated_at":"2025-04-24T16:12:56+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":60,"support_request":10,"confidence":80,"impact":55,"quick_win":22.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":6550,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"5329","title":"Colcon build failed with extension ros2-humble-ros-base","author":"czarekk215","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/5329","summary":"Colcon build fails with ModuleNotFoundError for 'lark' when using ros2-humble-ros-base content-sharing extension to build ROS 2 packages with msg/srv files. Maintainer provided workaround (add python3-lark to build-packages). Triaged, awaiting reporter confirmation.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is triaged (labeled Status: Triaged, Type: Question) and the maintainer artivis responded on 2025-03-14 with a concrete workaround (adding python3-lark to build-packages) and asked for a public repo or minimal reproducer. The reporter has not yet confirmed whether the workaround resolved the issue. The underlying problem — that the ros2-humble-ros-base content-sharing extension does not automatically include python3-lark in the build environment, causing msg/srv builds to fail — is a real gap in the extension's build-packages list. The extension code in _ros2_humble_meta.py only appends libpython3.10-dev to build-packages but does not include python3-lark, which rosidl_parser requires. This is a legitimate bug in the extension's dependency handling, not purely a support question. The issue should remain open until the reporter confirms the workaround or a fix is implemented in the extension.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":28.0,"staleness":55,"complexity":30,"confidence":65,"support_request":70},"age_days":548,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Question"],"created_at":"2025-03-13T10:55:42+00:00","updated_at":"2025-03-18T12:40:46+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":30,"support_request":70,"confidence":65,"impact":40,"quick_win":28.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":12533,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"540","title":"Document parallel build count environment variables","author":"mr-cal","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/issues/540","summary":"Docs gap: CRAFT_PARALLEL_BUILD_COUNT and CRAFT_MAX_PARALLEL_BUILD_COUNT (and app-prefixed variants) are implemented in craft_application/util/system.py but not documented. Labeled enhancement/docs by a maintainer, open 679 days, no comments, still unaddressed.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is triaged (labeled Type: Enhancement and Type: Documentation, filed by maintainer mr-cal) and the gap is still real: get_parallel_build_count() in craft_application/util/system.py still reads both variables (plus app-prefixed variants), the 5.2.1 changelog notes they are forwarded to managed instances, yet no docs/reference page documents them. It is a small, valid documentation task that should remain open rather than be closed as stale.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":25.5,"staleness":55,"complexity":15,"confidence":80,"support_request":5},"age_days":691,"labels":["Type: Enhancement","Type: Documentation"],"created_at":"2024-10-21T16:18:20+00:00","updated_at":"2025-09-03T19:10:45+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":15,"support_request":5,"confidence":80,"impact":30,"quick_win":25.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":6348,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"5531","title":"build-on is/isn't mandatory/optional?","author":"waveform80","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/5531","summary":"Snapcraft 8.9.2 rejects empty-dict platform entries (e.g. amd64: {}) requiring build-on, contradicting docs. Maintainers confirmed behavior is intentional after craft-platforms refactor; decision made to update docs rather than restore empty-dict support.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainers explicitly decided on 2025-06-05 to 'leave this behavior as-is and update the documentation' after discussing with @lengau and @cmatsuoka. The docs still say build-on can be omitted for valid Debian arch names, but don't clarify that empty dicts are invalid — only null/empty values work. This is a pending doc fix that should remain open until the documentation is updated to clarify the distinction between omitted/null and empty-dict platform values.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":28.0,"staleness":55,"complexity":30,"confidence":85,"support_request":35},"age_days":465,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Documentation"],"created_at":"2025-06-04T11:13:34+00:00","updated_at":"2025-06-06T14:25:00+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":30,"support_request":35,"confidence":85,"impact":40,"quick_win":28.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":5189,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"486","title":"overlay-packages is not documented in rockcraft.yaml reference","author":"samuelallan72","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/486","summary":"overlay-packages (and other overlay part properties) are missing from the rockcraft.yaml reference docs; maintainer noted the fix belongs in craft-parts' part_properties.rst. Still open with no follow-up.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer tigarmo triaged this (2024-02-16) and identified the fix location as craft-parts' docs/base/part_properties.rst, but no PR or follow-up has addressed it since. The rockcraft.yaml reference still pulls part properties from craft-parts (docs/conf.py includes common/craft-parts/reference/part_properties.rst), and overlay parameters are only documented in the explanation section, so the gap likely persists. Low complexity doc fix that remains valid.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":24.0,"staleness":55,"complexity":20,"confidence":70,"support_request":5},"age_days":940,"labels":["Type: Documentation"],"created_at":"2024-02-16T01:53:36+00:00","updated_at":"2025-12-11T15:03:07+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":20,"support_request":5,"confidence":70,"impact":30,"quick_win":24.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":12059,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"1015","title":"Improve craft tool dev experience with destructive mode","author":"bepri","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/issues/1015","summary":"Feature request from maintainer bepri to smooth destructive-mode dev workflow: after sudo pack leaves root-owned dirs, non-root pack crashes with raw PermissionError. Proposes UID-scoped caches or better permission error messages. Open 195 days, no labels, no comments.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"Despite being filed by maintainer bepri, the issue has no labels, no comments, and no activity in 195 days, showing no triage or prioritization. The referenced PR #974 (merged) only added a non-root warning and did not implement any of the three proposed solutions, and the code still shows to_yaml_file raising a raw PermissionError with no friendly handling, so the issue remains valid and open-ended.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":55,"complexity":55,"confidence":75,"support_request":10},"age_days":207,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-02-17T20:19:30+00:00","updated_at":"2026-02-17T20:19:30+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":55,"support_request":10,"confidence":75,"impact":40,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":39452,"project_name":"craft-platforms","source":"github","external_id":"217","title":"feat: allow `devel` in multi-base charm builds","author":"Copilot","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-platforms/pull/217","summary":"Allow devel series in multi-base charm build-on entries. Approved by 2 reviewers with 10 unresolved comments, all CI passing, last activity 49 days ago.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"PR has 2 approvals and passing CI but 10 unresolved review comments remain, indicating the review process is incomplete. Last activity was 49 days ago, so a maintainer should review the unresolved comments and decide whether to request changes or merge.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":27.5,"staleness":55,"complexity":45,"confidence":70},"age_days":144,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-04-21T20:21:19+00:00","updated_at":"2026-07-17T11:23:42+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":45,"support_request":null,"confidence":70,"impact":50,"quick_win":27.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":5523,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"151","title":"Check ROCK name, summary, description","author":"sergiusens","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/151","summary":"Request to add validation rules for rock name, summary, and description beyond basic string checks. Issue is underspecified; a 2026-03-18 comment asks maintainers to clarify desired validation rules before it becomes actionable.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"A maintainer (gcomneno) actively engaged 166 days ago, asking for clarification on which validation rules are desired beyond the current string checks, and tagging the original author. The issue remains open and awaiting a response from the reporter, so it should stay open rather than be closed as stale.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":55,"complexity":40,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":1383,"labels":[],"created_at":"2022-11-29T10:24:16+00:00","updated_at":"2026-03-18T17:53:01+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":2212,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"1917","title":"Charmcraft cannot parse a dev version build for multipass","author":"jat-canonical","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/1917","summary":"Charmcraft pack fails with InvalidVersion on dev multipass builds (e.g. 1.15.0-dev.2929.pr661). Root cause traced to craft-providers version parsing; upstream fix landed in craft-providers. Issue is triaged and effectively resolved upstream.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer lengau triaged this, confirmed the error originates in craft-providers (not charmcraft), and filed upstream bug canonical/craft-providers#661. The fix 'fix(multipass): parse dev multipass versions' (d7cfb80) is present in craft-providers, and charmcraft depends on craft-providers>=3.7.1. The issue is a real bug that was properly triaged and addressed upstream, so it should remain open until the reporter confirms the fix or a maintainer closes it.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"staleness":55,"complexity":40,"confidence":75,"support_request":10},"age_days":718,"labels":["Type: Bug"],"created_at":"2024-09-24T13:34:50+00:00","updated_at":"2025-12-03T18:48:11+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":75,"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":4929,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"746","title":"Investigate dropping virtual envs from the python-based plugins","author":"tigarmo","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/746","summary":"Investigate dropping virtual envs from python-based plugins to fix 24.04 usrmerge breakage and simplify sitecustomize/symlink handling. Last activity 381 days ago; venv-based approach still present in codebase.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue was filed by a maintainer (tigarmo) as an internal investigation task with a Jira ticket (CRAFT-3657), indicating it was triaged and acknowledged. The venv-based approach with sitecustomize is still present in the codebase (python_common.py, python_plugin.py), and the docs still reference python3-venv requirements. However, the project has since added a uv plugin (#792) and disabled uv/poetry in 25.10+ (5e1e3471), suggesting the plugin landscape has evolved. The issue remains relevant as the core venv+sitecustomize pattern persists in the python plugin, but the specific 24.04 usrmerge breakage may have been addressed by other means (e.g., #498 removing usrmerge-breaking symlinks).","scores":{"impact":65,"quick_win":19.5,"staleness":55,"complexity":70,"confidence":60,"support_request":5},"age_days":674,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-11-07T13:22:54+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:12:45+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":70,"support_request":5,"confidence":60,"impact":65,"quick_win":19.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":6711,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"5168","title":"Add `plugs` and `slots` keys to the project model","author":"mr-cal","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/5168","summary":"Request to add plugs and slots keys to the project model for early validation. The slots key is now defined in project.py with a validator, so the core ask appears addressed.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is triaged (Status: Triaged, Type: Enhancement) and references a real validation gap (issue #5172). The slots key is now present in project.py (line 1767) with a _validate_slots validator, but the plugs type is still loose (dict[str, ContentPlug | Any]) and the issue may not be fully closed. Last activity was 493 days ago, so it's moderately stale but the work appears partially done.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":24.0,"staleness":55,"complexity":40,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":646,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2024-12-05T20:32:12+00:00","updated_at":"2025-04-25T20:02:50+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":40,"quick_win":24.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":1885,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2247","title":"The charm build failed due to the recent release of wheel version 0.46.1.","author":"adglkh","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/2247","summary":"Charm builds fail after wheel 0.46.1 (Apr 2025) because charmcraft's --no-binary=:all: forces source builds, hitting 'invalid command bdist_wheel' (pypa/wheel#660). Workaround: pin wheel==0.45.1. Unlabelled, one confirming comment, no maintainer response.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"No labels, no assignee, and no maintainer response — only a second user (@andogq) confirming the same failure and linking pypa/wheel#660. The current charm_builder.py still installs with --no-binary=:all: (lines 286/302) and no commit pins wheel or addresses bdist_wheel, so it appears unfixed, but I could not confirm whether a fix landed elsewhere, so a maintainer should verify before closing.","scores":{"impact":60,"quick_win":27.0,"staleness":55,"complexity":55,"confidence":62,"support_request":15},"age_days":522,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-04-09T05:04:27+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:17:51+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":55,"support_request":15,"confidence":62,"impact":60,"quick_win":27.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":4790,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"885","title":"fix: Removed reference to snapcraft.yaml in expand extensions","author":"RafaelJohn9","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/pull/885","summary":"One-line fix removing the snapcraft.yaml reference from the expand-extensions help text and docstring, fixing #658. Approved by 2 reviewers with all CI checks green, but unmerged and inactive ~6 months; the fix is still unapplied in the codebase.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"The PR has 2 approvals, all CI checks passing, and 0 unresolved comments, and it fixes still-open issue #658. I verified the snapcraft.yaml references remain in rockcraft/commands/extensions.py (lines 85, 88), so the fix is unapplied and the PR is ready to be landed by a maintainer. A newer duplicate PR #1103 exists, but this older PR is the canonical one.","scores":{"impact":10,"quick_win":9.5,"staleness":55,"complexity":5,"confidence":85},"age_days":482,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-05-19T04:32:56+00:00","updated_at":"2026-03-04T08:08:20+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":5,"support_request":null,"confidence":85,"impact":10,"quick_win":9.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":1478,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2668","title":"tests: add reproducer for dev multipass version causing InvalidVersion (#1917)","author":"lengau","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/pull/2668","summary":"Adds a failing unit test reproducing #1917 (multipass dev version causes InvalidVersion crash) and a fix catching InvalidVersion in ProviderService.instance(). 128 days old, 0 reviewers, issue still open, fix not yet in main branch.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"Issue #1917 is still open and the fix (catching InvalidVersion in ProviderService.instance) is absent from the main branch — grep for 'InvalidVersion' in provider.py returns no matches and no commit referencing 177e89a or #1917 exists in git log. The PR is 128 days old with 0 reviewers, but the underlying bug remains unfixed and the upstream craft-providers#661 was closed without resolution, so the charmcraft-side fix is still needed. A maintainer should review and land this.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":29.25,"staleness":55,"complexity":35,"confidence":75},"age_days":144,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-04-22T03:05:50+00:00","updated_at":"2026-04-22T04:23:46+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":35,"support_request":null,"confidence":75,"impact":45,"quick_win":29.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":7423,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"4454","title":"Allow snapcraft to use remote lxd instances.","author":"jat-canonical","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/4454","summary":"Feature request to let snapcraft build against a remote LXD instance (via lxc remote config) instead of requiring a local LXD install, enabling snap development on macOS/Windows. Triaged and tracked in Jira (CRAFT-2554); follow-up discussion moved to craft-providers#508, which remains open.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is labelled Status: Triaged and Type: Enhancement, and a maintainer (mr-cal) explicitly redirected the discussion to craft-providers#508 (2024-02-27), where remote LXD cluster support is acknowledged as partially implemented but still needing UX and cross-architecture work. The linked craft-providers issue is still open, so this remains a valid, actively-tracked enhancement rather than a stale or resolved item.","scores":{"impact":60,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":55,"complexity":70,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":1027,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2023-11-21T09:32:37+00:00","updated_at":"2025-04-24T15:30:17+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":70,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":60,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":1576,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2565","title":"fix(plugins/uv): Avoid modifying already relocatable venv","author":"carlcsaposs-canonical","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/pull/2565","summary":"Avoids sed-patching the activate script for the uv plugin since craft-parts already creates relocatable venvs via uv venv --relocatable. Small 2-file diff, pending review with 0 reviewers; CI has several failing jobs (snap-tests, Trivy, typecheck-with-ty) that the author says are unrelated.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"The PR is a small, well-scoped cleanup (17+/8- lines) that removes a fragile sed patch of the uv-generated activate script in favor of uv's public --relocatable API, which is already used by craft-parts' uv plugin (confirmed in craft_parts/plugins/uv_plugin.py). The code in charmcraft/utils/parts.py still contains the sed command, so the fix is not yet merged. Last activity was 200 days ago with only the author's comment about unrelated CI failures and zero maintainer interaction, so it needs a maintainer to review and address the failing CI checks (snap-tests, Trivy, typecheck-with-ty).","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":25.5,"staleness":55,"complexity":15,"confidence":75},"age_days":218,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-02-06T15:52:49+00:00","updated_at":"2026-02-09T10:00:27+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":15,"support_request":null,"confidence":75,"impact":30,"quick_win":25.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":5969,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"5944","title":"docs: Discord isn't a great example for an electron app","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/5944","summary":"Docs improvement: the Discord example in the Electron how-to only shows deb extraction, not actual Electron app building. Suggests Signal as a better example. No maintainer response in 238 days; Discord example still present in docs.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is a valid documentation improvement (verified the Discord example still exists in docs/how-to/integrations/craft-an-electron-app.rst), but has zero comments, no assignee, and no maintainer response in 238 days. It has a 'Type: Documentation' label but shows no sign of being assessed, prioritized, or scheduled for work.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":20.0,"staleness":55,"complexity":20,"confidence":78,"support_request":10},"age_days":250,"labels":["Type: Documentation"],"created_at":"2026-01-05T19:15:59+00:00","updated_at":"2026-01-05T19:15:59+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":20,"support_request":10,"confidence":78,"impact":25,"quick_win":20.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":5888,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"6032","title":"New issue template - \"check existing issues\" is worded quite strong","author":"YanisaHS","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/6032","summary":"Suggests softening the 'Check existing issues' checkbox wording in issue templates from 'I've verified...' to a less strict phrasing. Maintainer agreed and looped in template author, but no fix applied yet; wording unchanged in all three templates.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer @bepri explicitly agreed ('I think this wording change would be good') and looped in the template author @jahn-junior, but no PR has been filed since. The strict wording 'I've verified that this request isn't described by any existing issues.' is still present in bug.yaml, docs.yaml, and task.yaml, so the issue remains valid and actionable.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":14.25,"staleness":55,"complexity":5,"confidence":85,"support_request":20},"age_days":213,"labels":["Type: Documentation"],"created_at":"2026-02-11T17:19:42+00:00","updated_at":"2026-02-11T19:16:40+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":5,"support_request":20,"confidence":85,"impact":15,"quick_win":14.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":6006,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"5900","title":"docs: Add `snap run --strace` discussion to the “Debug a Snap” Guide","author":"hillpd","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/5900","summary":"Docs request to add a `snap run --strace` section to the 'Debug a Snap' guide for capturing syscalls under confinement. Maintainer acknowledged it was likely lost in a docs migration; no strace content exists in the repo yet.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer @bepri acknowledged the request (2025-12-05), noting the `snap run --strace` content was likely lost in a recent docs overhaul/migration, confirming it is a real gap. The current debug-a-snap.rst ends with a 'Debug with snapd' section that only links out to snapd docs and contains no strace reference (verified via grep), so the request remains valid and applicable.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":21.25,"staleness":55,"complexity":15,"confidence":70,"support_request":0},"age_days":281,"labels":["Type: Documentation"],"created_at":"2025-12-05T16:29:53+00:00","updated_at":"2025-12-05T21:27:27+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":15,"support_request":0,"confidence":70,"impact":25,"quick_win":21.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":5644,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"30","title":"redundant whiteouts cause a path error ","author":"cjdcordeiro","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/30","summary":"Redundant OCI whiteout entries in rockcraft layers cause path errors in tools like dive. Fix appears implemented in craft-parts via filter_dangling_whiteouts; issue open since 2022 with recent triage asking for re-test, no response yet.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The specific problem (whiteout files referencing files that don't exist in the base layer) is addressed by craft-parts' filter_dangling_whiteouts() in migration.py, which removes whiteouts with no backing file in the base dir. Rockcraft updated to craft-parts 1.13.0+ which includes this fix. The last triage comment (166 days ago) asked for re-testing and clarification, with no response from the reporter.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":24.0,"staleness":55,"complexity":40,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":1602,"labels":[],"created_at":"2022-04-25T08:44:36+00:00","updated_at":"2026-03-18T17:09:58+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":40,"quick_win":24.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":5686,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"6240","title":"feat: recommend Snapcraft 9.x for core22, core24, and core26 bases","author":"rizqiamad","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/pull/6240","summary":"Adds a warning recommending Snapcraft 9.x for core22/core24/core26 bases. Approved by 1 reviewer but has 5 unresolved review comments and 4 failing CI checks. No activity for ~4 months. Closes #4958.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"The PR is approved but has 5 unresolved review comments and 4 failing CI checks (integration-spread-tests on ubuntu-22.04/24.04, OSV-scanner, slow tests). Last activity was 116 days ago with no follow-up from the author. The referenced issue #4958 remains open, so the work is still relevant but needs the author to address the outstanding review feedback and CI failures before it can be merged.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":29.75,"staleness":55,"complexity":15,"confidence":65},"age_days":130,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-05-06T03:40:37+00:00","updated_at":"2026-05-07T23:44:45+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":15,"support_request":null,"confidence":65,"impact":35,"quick_win":29.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":5847,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"6073","title":"docs: add gnome-keyring example for WSL users (fixes #6049)","author":"Dotunbey","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/pull/6073","summary":"Adds a 16-line gnome-keyring install/config example for WSL users to the authentication how-to doc, fixing #6049. Maintainer commented in review; 8 unresolved comments, 0 approvals, no CI; inactive ~6 months.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"The PR is a trivial +16-line docs addition to docs/how-to/publishing/authenticate.rst (still present, keyring section unchanged) addressing issue #6049, which remains open. A maintainer (bepri) engaged in review ('my last comment in my review is moot'), but the PR has 0 formal reviewers, 8 unresolved review comments, no CI results, and no activity for ~6 months, so it needs a maintainer to re-review and land rather than being closed as irrelevant.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":23.75,"staleness":55,"complexity":5,"confidence":75},"age_days":193,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-03-03T14:34:44+00:00","updated_at":"2026-03-06T17:50:28+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":5,"support_request":null,"confidence":75,"impact":25,"quick_win":23.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":21910,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1174","title":"Craft parts should rebuild all parts if the list of partitions changes","author":"mr-cal","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/1174","summary":"Craft-parts should persist the partition list in state files and force a full rebuild (including stage/prime) when partitions change, since files are organized into partitions during build. Triaged bug, tracked as CRAFT-4654, with a maintainer note that partition changes should also trigger reprime/repack.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is a triaged bug (labels: Status: Triaged, Type: Bug) with a maintainer comment (cmatsuoka, 2025-07-18) confirming the expected behavior — partition add/remove should cause reprime and repack — and an internal ticket CRAFT-4654 was created. Code inspection shows StepState/MigrationState track per-partition migration contents but no top-level partition list, and no commit in history implements a 'rebuild all parts when partitions change' check, so the gap appears unfixed. It should stay open until implemented.","scores":{"impact":70,"quick_win":28.0,"staleness":55,"complexity":60,"confidence":75,"support_request":0},"age_days":424,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Bug"],"created_at":"2025-07-15T16:24:59+00:00","updated_at":"2025-07-18T12:59:16+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":60,"support_request":0,"confidence":75,"impact":70,"quick_win":28.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":12185,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"889","title":"Developer docs: Architecture explanation","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/issues/889","summary":"Developer docs enhancement to explain the purpose of commands, services, and what the application should/shouldn't do. Triaged by maintainer; a structure-of-a-craft-app explanation page now exists in docs/explanation covering Application, Commands, and Services.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is triaged (Status: Triaged, Type: Documentation/Enhancement) and the requested content appears largely addressed by docs/explanation/structure-of-a-craft-app.rst, which explains the Application, Commands, and Services and their responsibilities. However, the issue also asks for 'what the application should/shouldn't do' and per-command/per-service purpose, which may not be fully covered, so it should stay open for a maintainer to confirm scope before closing.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":28.0,"staleness":55,"complexity":30,"confidence":60,"support_request":0},"age_days":374,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Enhancement","Type: Documentation"],"created_at":"2025-09-03T18:59:31+00:00","updated_at":"2025-09-03T19:03:57+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":30,"support_request":0,"confidence":60,"impact":40,"quick_win":28.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":11859,"project_name":"debcraft","source":"github","external_id":"140","title":"Handle unquoted multi-arch: no","author":"cmatsuoka","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/debcraft/issues/140","summary":"YAML parser converts unquoted multi-arch: no to boolean false, producing a confusing generic validation error. Maintainer filed request to add a specific error message or accept false as synonym for \"no\". Unlabelled, no comments, no activity in 127 days.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is unlabelled, has no comments, and no assignee despite being filed by maintainer cmatsuoka 127 days ago. The codebase confirms the problem: the schema (schema/debcraft.json) restricts multi-arch to string enum [\"no\",\"same\",\"foreign\",\"allowed\"], and the existing invalid-multi-arch test only covers unquoted yes (→True), not unquoted no (→False). No commit or PR has addressed the boolean-input error message since PR #136 added multi-arch support.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":20.0,"staleness":55,"complexity":20,"confidence":75,"support_request":10},"age_days":139,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-04-26T13:18:49+00:00","updated_at":"2026-04-26T13:18:49+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":20,"support_request":10,"confidence":75,"impact":25,"quick_win":20.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":1500,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2643","title":"Reorganise sample charm documentation to include the most common keys at the top.","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/2643","summary":"Documentation improvement: reorganise sample charm YAML and reference docs so required/common keys (name, base, parts) appear first instead of alphabetically. Triaged by maintainer, no implementation yet; sample file still alphabetical.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Labelled Status: Triaged by maintainer lengau, confirming it is a recognised documentation improvement. The sample file docs/reference/files/charmcraft-sample-charm.yaml still lists keys alphabetically (actions, analysis, assumes, base, build-base, charm-libs, … name, parts) with required keys like name and parts buried mid-file, so the request remains unaddressed and relevant. No evidence of a fix in recent commits touching that path.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":17.0,"staleness":55,"complexity":15,"confidence":70,"support_request":0},"age_days":158,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Documentation"],"created_at":"2026-04-07T17:29:52+00:00","updated_at":"2026-04-07T17:30:13+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":15,"support_request":0,"confidence":70,"impact":20,"quick_win":17.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":13615,"project_name":"craft-cli","source":"github","external_id":"125","title":"When the Printer stops it needs to clean the last line if it was transient progress","author":"facundobatista","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-cli/issues/125","summary":"Printer leaves transient progress text on screen when stopping or pausing; it should be overwritten by the next output. Open since 2022, no comments, but a related fix (PR #126) already enhanced ephemeral handover after pause/stop.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue describes a real terminal-cleanup bug in the Printer's stop/pause path. Commit 9f9df27 (PR #126) already enhanced ephemeral message handover after pause() or stop(), and Printer.stop() now cleans the line when prv_msg is ephemeral, suggesting partial or full resolution. However, the issue remains open with no maintainer confirmation that both cases (pause and process-end) are fully fixed, so it should stay open pending verification.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":55,"complexity":40,"confidence":60,"support_request":0},"age_days":1437,"labels":[],"created_at":"2022-10-06T14:46:37+00:00","updated_at":"2025-03-10T18:59:06+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":40,"support_request":0,"confidence":60,"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":1676,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2461","title":"uv plugin doesn't cache wheels to LXC host","author":"carlcsaposs-canonical","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/2461","summary":"uv plugin with no-binary=true does not persist built wheels to the LXC host shared cache (CRAFT_SHARED_CACHE); only the pip cache dir is mounted, so the uv cache stays container-local.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"No labels, no maintainer response, and only the reporter's own follow-up comment (2025-10-10) noting the uv cache lives at /root/snap/charmcraft/common/cache/uv. Code confirms craft-providers' _mount_shared_cache_dirs only mounts the pip cache subdir, so the uv cache is never shared to the host — a real, reproducible bug that needs triage/assignment.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"staleness":55,"complexity":40,"confidence":75,"support_request":10},"age_days":338,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-10-10T09:12:55+00:00","updated_at":"2025-12-03T18:34:25+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":75,"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":7533,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"4344","title":"Treat the gadget.yaml like other snap meta files","author":"dilyn-corner","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/4344","summary":"Enhancement to move gadget.yaml source location from project root to snap/gadget.yaml for consistency with other snap meta files. Triaged, acknowledged by maintainer who linked it to issue #4892 as a prerequisite. Code still reads from root; not yet implemented.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is triaged (labeled 'Status: Triaged') and explicitly acknowledged by maintainer @mr-cal who stated 'When we implement #4892, we should implement this as well,' establishing a clear dependency. Code inspection confirms gadget.yaml is still read from project_dir root in both setup_assets.py and package.py, so the feature remains unimplemented. Last activity was 207 days ago (just over 6 months), within the moderately-stale range, and the issue is scoped to a specific, valid enhancement.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":15.75,"staleness":55,"complexity":55,"confidence":72,"support_request":10},"age_days":1107,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2023-09-01T15:06:20+00:00","updated_at":"2026-02-05T16:20:21+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":55,"support_request":10,"confidence":72,"impact":35,"quick_win":15.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":12753,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"320","title":"Set the project environment in the Lifecycle Service","author":"mr-cal","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/issues/320","summary":"Request to set CRAFT_PROJECT_NAME/VERSION env vars in the Lifecycle Service build environment. Code now has ProjectService.update_project_environment() hook, but only CRAFT_PROJECT_VERSION is set by default; CRAFT_PROJECT_NAME still missing. A July 2024 comment reports SNAPCRAFT_PROJECT_NAME=None in PULL phase.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is a real bug/feature request (not support) with a follow-up report (brlin-tw, 2024-07-06) confirming SNAPCRAFT_PROJECT_NAME=None in the PULL phase, so it remains reproducible. The codebase now has a ProjectService.update_project_environment() hook (added via #646, deprecated _set_global_environment removed in #1078) that sets only CRAFT_PROJECT_VERSION, leaving CRAFT_PROJECT_NAME unset — the core ask is still unmet. No labels/assignee, so it needs triage, but the problem is clearly still applicable to current code, so keep open.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"staleness":55,"complexity":40,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":871,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-04-24T12:58:25+00:00","updated_at":"2025-05-23T17:26:56+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":5711,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"6214","title":"feat(extensions): support filtering by base","author":"gcomneno","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/pull/6214","summary":"Adds --base option to snapcraft extensions command for filtering by base, mirroring plugins --base. 128 days old, 0 reviewer engagement, 2 unrelated CI failures, feature still unimplemented on main.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"Small, well-scoped feature (+67/-4, 2 files) mirroring the existing plugins --base pattern; issue #4360 remains open and the code on main still lacks the option. No maintainer has reviewed in 128 days, and the two failing CI checks (spread core24/try, OSV-scanner) appear unrelated per the author's analysis. Needs a maintainer to triage and approve or request changes.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":20.0,"staleness":55,"complexity":20,"confidence":78},"age_days":140,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-04-25T10:16:13+00:00","updated_at":"2026-04-25T11:26:50+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":20,"support_request":null,"confidence":78,"impact":25,"quick_win":20.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":2694,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"1434","title":"Improve Documentation for 'charmcraft help clean' Command","author":"mateofloreza","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/1434","summary":"Request to improve documentation for the 'charmcraft help clean' command, which the reporter says lacks usage and purpose details. The clean command is inherited from craft-application's lifecycle module; no maintainer has responded (0 comments, no labels).","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is a legitimate documentation improvement request with no maintainer response, no labels, and no assignee, so it has not been triaged. The clean command still exists (inherited from craft_application.commands.lifecycle.CleanCommand in lifecycle.py), so the request remains applicable. It is a low-impact docs-only change, but it needs a maintainer to confirm scope and whether the help text should be overridden in charmcraft or addressed upstream in craft-application.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":16.0,"staleness":55,"complexity":20,"confidence":55,"support_request":10},"age_days":1006,"labels":[],"created_at":"2023-12-11T11:22:46+00:00","updated_at":"2026-07-15T20:23:58+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":20,"support_request":10,"confidence":55,"impact":20,"quick_win":16.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":1481,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2665","title":"tests: add reproducer for upload crash outside project directory (#2492)","author":"lengau","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/pull/2665","summary":"Adds failing unit test reproducing #2492 (charmcraft upload RuntimeError outside project dir) plus a try/except fix in UploadCommand.run(). Pending review, 0 reviewers, 128 days inactive. Bug still present in main.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"Issue #2492 is still open and the unconditional self._services.get(\"project\").get() call at store.py:625 is still present in main, confirming the bug persists. The PR (from maintainer lengau) includes both a reproducer test and a Copilot-proposed fix (commit 80f7efa, unverified in main), but has sat 128 days with 0 reviewers and no maintainer sign-off. Needs a review to validate the fix and land it.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":29.25,"staleness":55,"complexity":35,"confidence":65},"age_days":144,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-04-22T02:55:31+00:00","updated_at":"2026-04-22T04:24:13+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":35,"support_request":null,"confidence":65,"impact":45,"quick_win":29.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":21772,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1313","title":"go-use test isn't working on arm64 github-hosted runners","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/1313","summary":"test_go_use fails on github-hosted arm64 runners because the test needs go 1.24 but runners have go 1.22 with downloads disabled. Triaged by maintainer; test is currently skipped on aarch64 github-hosted runners referencing this issue (#1313).","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is triaged (labeled Status: Triaged, Type: Bug) and the test still carries a skipif marker referencing this exact issue (#1313) in tests/integration/plugins/test_go.py, meaning the underlying problem (go 1.24 requirement vs go 1.22 on arm64 runners with GOPROXY=off) remains unresolved. A related commit 'ci: fix go_use test (#1455)' exists but the skip is still present in current code, so the issue should stay open until the runner Go version is bumped or the test is re-enabled.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":17.5,"staleness":55,"complexity":30,"confidence":80,"support_request":0},"age_days":361,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Bug"],"created_at":"2025-09-17T01:08:04+00:00","updated_at":"2025-09-17T01:08:21+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":30,"support_request":0,"confidence":80,"impact":25,"quick_win":17.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":1762,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2374","title":"Add `charmcraft lint` to enforce Canonical recommendations","author":"taurus-forever","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/2374","summary":"Feature request for a charmcraft lint command to enforce naming convention consistency (hyphens vs underscores) in actions/options. The NamingConventions linter already exists via charmcraft analyse (PR #1487), but a dedicated lint command and pre-linting during pack are not yet implemented. Maintainer acknowledged, blocked on #2315 which is now closed/abandoned.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The NamingConventions linter (added in PR #1487) already checks hyphen/underscore consistency in actions and config options via charmcraft analyse, partially addressing the core ask. However, the specific request for a charmcraft lint command and pre-linting during charmcraft pack remains unimplemented. Maintainer @lengau acknowledged the issue (2025-07-22) and cited #2315 as a blocker; that issue is now closed/abandoned, so the path forward needs re-evaluation but the feature gap is still real.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":19.25,"staleness":55,"complexity":45,"confidence":72,"support_request":10},"age_days":423,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-07-17T09:01:45+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:17:31+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":45,"support_request":10,"confidence":72,"impact":35,"quick_win":19.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":39557,"project_name":"starbase","source":"github","external_id":"541","title":"Renovate complaints thread","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/starbase/issues/541","summary":"Meta-issue collecting renovate configuration complaints from maintainers; last active 70 days ago with no labels or assignee.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"This is a maintainer-created collection thread with no labels, assignee, or triage status. Multiple maintainers have contributed complaints (OSV prioritization, wrong PR titles, auto-merge behavior, config simplification), but no maintainer has acknowledged or prioritized addressing them. The last activity was 70 days ago, indicating it needs triage to determine which complaints to act on.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":27.5,"staleness":55,"complexity":45,"confidence":65,"support_request":15},"age_days":101,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-06-03T10:07:27+00:00","updated_at":"2026-06-26T11:39:27+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":45,"support_request":15,"confidence":65,"impact":50,"quick_win":27.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":1829,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2304","title":"Specify discouraged paths for mount points","author":"sed-i","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/2304","summary":"Docs enhancement to add discouraged mount paths (e.g. /charm, /tmp) to the storage location reference. Triaged, acknowledged by maintainer as a good idea requiring research, no progress since Sep 2025.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer @lengau explicitly acknowledged the request (2025-09-17) as 'a good idea' but noted it requires research to determine an appropriate list of discouraged paths. The issue is triaged with labels, has an internal Jira ticket (CHARMCRAFT-646), and the docs file still lacks the suggested guidance. Inactivity is ~6 months, not yet at the threshold for closing, and the work is scoped but pending research.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":17.5,"staleness":55,"complexity":30,"confidence":82,"support_request":10},"age_days":467,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Documentation"],"created_at":"2025-06-02T17:59:58+00:00","updated_at":"2026-02-13T18:46:30+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":30,"support_request":10,"confidence":82,"impact":25,"quick_win":17.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":30047,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"2147036","title":"Lots of noise produced at the end of build","author":"~nteodosio","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2147036","summary":"Excessive output noise when using --debug mode; newline characters replaced by literal \\n strings, creating thousands of lines of noise that obscure the actual build error","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no maintainer comments, no labels, and no assignee after 156 days. While the reported behavior (excessive output noise with literal \\n characters replacing newlines) appears to be a valid bug rather than a support request, no maintainer has acknowledged or triaged it yet. The moderate staleness score (55) reflects the lack of activity but not enough to confirm the issue is obsolete.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":37.5,"staleness":55,"complexity":25,"confidence":45,"support_request":10},"age_days":164,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-04-01T15:13:55.469843+00:00","updated_at":"2026-04-01T15:13:57.554337+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":25,"support_request":10,"confidence":45,"impact":50,"quick_win":37.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":12151,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"923","title":"`CraftSpreadYaml` should accept the `environment` key","author":"lczyk","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/issues/923","summary":"Request to add top-level environment key to CraftSpreadYaml/CraftTestYaml for global spread test env vars. Triaged, maintainer says implementation is trivial but decision pending. Author found per-suite workaround; feature still unimplemented.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer @lengau acknowledged the issue and explicitly stated 'Implementation is trivial — deciding whether this is something we want to include is nontrivial!' while tagging @cmatsuoka for a decision. The author found a per-suite workaround but noted 'the global environment would still be nice.' The code still lacks the feature (CraftTestYaml has extra='forbid' with no environment field), and the issue remains valid despite 339 days of inactivity.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":24.5,"staleness":55,"complexity":30,"confidence":72,"support_request":10},"age_days":351,"labels":["Type: Enhancement","Status: Needs information"],"created_at":"2025-09-26T15:45:16+00:00","updated_at":"2025-09-26T16:12:10+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":30,"support_request":10,"confidence":72,"impact":35,"quick_win":24.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":5508,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"166","title":"Overlay contents might not be preserved between parts","author":"tigarmo","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/166","summary":"Overlay directory not preserved between parts' overlay-scripts (e.g., rm then mkdir lib32). Filed by maintainer 1355 days ago; last activity 166 days ago was an unanswered question about reproducibility on current versions. No labels or assignee.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 1355 days old and the last activity (166 days ago) was a question from @gcomneno asking whether it is still reproducible on current rockcraft/craft-parts versions, which went unanswered. The specific ubuntu-18.04 base referenced in the reproducer is EOL, and the overlay mechanism in craft-parts has undergone significant changes since filing (e.g., whiteout handling in #163, overlay migration fixes). Without a confirmed reproducer on a supported base, the issue no longer reflects a current actionable bug.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":55,"complexity":55,"confidence":55,"support_request":10},"age_days":1367,"labels":[],"created_at":"2022-12-15T18:25:30+00:00","updated_at":"2026-03-18T17:54:48+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":55,"support_request":10,"confidence":55,"impact":40,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":1702,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2435","title":"docs: permission docs are missing","author":"beliaev-maksim","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/2435","summary":"Charmcraft login reference docs lack a list of valid --permission values. A maintainer replied (2025-09-10) that permissions are store-controlled and the list can change, and asked @medubelko/@jahn-junior to weigh in on how to document them; no resolution yet.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"A maintainer explicitly triaged this on 2025-09-10, acknowledging the gap and stating 'I think we'll need @medubelko or @jahn-junior to weigh in on how we can do this' — it's an open decision, not an abandoned report. The how-to page (docs/howto/manage-the-current-charmhub-user.rst) already lists the permissions, but the referenced login command reference page still lacks them, so the issue remains valid and awaiting a maintainer decision.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":21.0,"staleness":55,"complexity":40,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":374,"labels":["Type: Documentation"],"created_at":"2025-09-03T14:45:04+00:00","updated_at":"2025-09-10T17:42:07+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":35,"quick_win":21.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":6036,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"5859","title":"Non-list `build-for` values are no longer allowed","author":"bepri","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/5859","summary":"snapcraft 8.13.0 rejects valid non-list build-for values (e.g. build-for: amd64) in core22 platforms, raising an unhelpful RuntimeError instead of treating the string as a single-entry list. Triaged, open, no fix yet.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is a genuine regression: the Architecture model documents that a string build-for is parsed into a single-entry list at runtime, but get_build_for() at project.py:2254 only handles isinstance(build_for, list), so a scalar value falls through to the RuntimeError. The label 'Status: Triaged' and the linked internal ticket SNAPCRAFT-1253 confirm maintainer acknowledgement, so it should stay open until a fix lands.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"staleness":55,"complexity":40,"confidence":70,"support_request":5},"age_days":317,"labels":["Status: Triaged"],"created_at":"2025-10-30T19:12:45+00:00","updated_at":"2025-10-30T20:03:38+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":40,"support_request":5,"confidence":70,"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":39100,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"6291","title":"New version gives error","author":"silicology1","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/6291","summary":"Git clone fails with exit code 128 during snapcraft pack; maintainer requested a reproducer but none provided yet.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"A maintainer (@mr-cal) has triaged the issue and requested a reproducer 59 days ago, but the reporter has not responded. Per guidelines, keep_open is appropriate when a maintainer has asked for further information and has been waiting less than 6 months. The issue has the 'Status: Needs information' label, confirming it has been assessed.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"staleness":55,"complexity":40,"confidence":65,"support_request":60},"age_days":93,"labels":["Status: Needs information"],"created_at":"2026-06-12T09:34:27+00:00","updated_at":"2026-07-07T12:10:40+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":40,"support_request":60,"confidence":65,"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":15246,"project_name":"craft-store","source":"github","external_id":"208","title":"Rewrite with `httpx`","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-store/issues/208","summary":"Feature request to rewrite craft-store using httpx instead of requests, to work around requests version pinning issues. Partially implemented: httpx-based auth classes and Publisher Gateway client exist, but core clients still use requests.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The rewrite is partially complete - httpx auth classes (_httpx_auth.py) and Publisher Gateway client exist, but core clients (base_client.py, http_client.py, ubuntu_one_store_client.py) still import requests. The issue remains relevant as the migration is incomplete. Last activity was 487 days ago with only a bot comment, but the work is demonstrably in progress.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":15.0,"staleness":55,"complexity":70,"confidence":65,"support_request":0},"age_days":729,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-09-13T20:45:25+00:00","updated_at":"2025-05-01T16:43:49+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":70,"support_request":0,"confidence":65,"impact":50,"quick_win":15.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":5780,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"6140","title":"`SNAPCRAFT_UA_TOKEN` does not work on `base: core24`","author":"dilyn-corner","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/6140","summary":"SNAPCRAFT_UA_TOKEN is ignored for base: core24 managed builds, so ESM archives are unavailable; triaged, and current code/docs intentionally use host Pro token with --pro for core24+ instead of the legacy UA token.","suggested_action":"close_not_a_bug","suggested_action_reason":"Current core24+ code in snapcraft/commands/lifecycle.py explicitly warns \"Ignoring the 'SNAPCRAFT_UA_TOKEN' environment variable. The Pro token attached to the host will be used instead\" and errors on --ua-token, and the 9.1 release notes deprecate ua-services for core24+ in favor of the new --pro=<services> option documented in pack-a-pro-snap.rst. The reported behavior is the intended design: core24+ Pro builds attach the host's Pro token rather than an env-var token, so the user's expectation of SNAPCRAFT_UA_TOKEN working on core24 is not supported; the supported path is a Pro-attached host plus --pro=esm-apps,esm-infra.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"staleness":55,"complexity":40,"confidence":70,"support_request":30},"age_days":166,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Bug"],"created_at":"2026-03-30T18:30:15+00:00","updated_at":"2026-03-31T12:37:01+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":40,"support_request":30,"confidence":70,"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":12521,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"552","title":"Add a way for applications to customize the  `InitService`","author":"mr-cal","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/issues/552","summary":"Enhancement request for InitService to let applications customize project-name validation and emit template-specific messages. Name validation is already customizable via constructor args; unique per-template messages are not yet supported.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is a labeled enhancement filed by a maintainer with an internal Jira ticket (CRAFT-3659), so it is triaged and valid. Code inspection shows name validation is already customizable (name_regex, invalid_name_message, default_name in InitService.__init__), but no mechanism exists for template-specific messages, so the request is only partially addressed and should remain open.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":26.0,"staleness":55,"complexity":35,"confidence":75,"support_request":5},"age_days":674,"labels":["Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2024-11-07T13:40:14+00:00","updated_at":"2025-09-03T19:08:23+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":35,"support_request":5,"confidence":75,"impact":40,"quick_win":26.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":22230,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"855","title":"Add default building behavior to the documentation","author":"dariuszd21","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/855","summary":"Docs task to document that the CMake plugin builds in Debug by default and encourage switching to Release for packaged apps, with a bonus to cover the Rust plugin. Open, labelled Documentation, last activity 47 days ago; cmake docs already show a CMAKE_BUILD_TYPE example but do not state the Debug default.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Labelled Type: Documentation and triaged by a maintainer (dariuszd21) with an internal Jira ticket (CRAFT-3456), so it is categorised and valid. The cmake_plugin.rst already shows a CMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=RelWithDebInfo example but does not state the Debug default or encourage Release for packaged apps, so the request is still unmet; last activity was 47 days ago, so it is not stale enough to close.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":24.0,"staleness":55,"complexity":20,"confidence":60,"support_request":0},"age_days":718,"labels":["Type: Documentation"],"created_at":"2024-09-24T17:33:07+00:00","updated_at":"2026-07-15T17:59:07+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":20,"support_request":0,"confidence":60,"impact":30,"quick_win":24.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":12615,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"458","title":"Emit a warning when the fetch-service integration is enabled","author":"tigarmo","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/issues/458","summary":"Request to emit a warning when the fetch-service integration is enabled, so users know it is experimental. The warning was implemented in PR #496 and is present in the code; the issue is resolved but not yet closed.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The requested warning is already implemented: craft_application/services/fetch.py emits 'Warning: the fetch-service integration is experimental...' and merged PR #496 'feat: mark the fetch-service integration as experimental' resolved this (with a matching test_warning_experimental). Since the feature was implemented, the issue is no longer actionable.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":25.5,"staleness":55,"complexity":15,"confidence":85,"support_request":5},"age_days":730,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-09-12T11:57:10+00:00","updated_at":"2025-05-23T17:26:57+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":15,"support_request":5,"confidence":85,"impact":30,"quick_win":25.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":12588,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"485","title":"Provide a better error message when loading a multi-document yaml","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/issues/485","summary":"Request to improve the error message when loading multi-document YAML files, currently showing a raw ComposerError instead of a clear 'not supported' message. Untriaged, no labels, no maintainer response since the Jira bot comment.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no maintainer acknowledgement, and only a Jira sync bot comment. The current code in craft_application/util/yaml.py wraps yaml.YAMLError into YamlError via from_yaml_error, but does not special-case multi-document YAML (ComposerError) to produce a user-friendly 'multi-document YAML not supported' message. The fix is straightforward: detect ComposerError or multi-document streams in safe_yaml_load and raise a YamlError with a clear resolution message.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":25.5,"staleness":55,"complexity":15,"confidence":72,"support_request":0},"age_days":722,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-09-20T19:23:18+00:00","updated_at":"2025-05-23T17:26:55+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":15,"support_request":0,"confidence":72,"impact":30,"quick_win":25.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":6195,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"5691","title":"Proposal: Metadata Separation of Snap Versions","author":"erik78se","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/5691","summary":"Proposal to add separate workload-version and snap-version fields to snap metadata for clearer version display. Maintainer acknowledged and directed discussion to forum; no further activity for ~13 months. No implementation in codebase.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer @mr-cal acknowledged the proposal and directed discussion to the snapcraft forum, indicating it's a valid enhancement requiring cross-component (snapcraft/snapd/store) discussion. The problem remains unaddressed in code (no workload-version or snap-version fields in schema), so the issue is still relevant and awaiting broader architectural decision.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":6.75,"staleness":55,"complexity":85,"confidence":75,"support_request":5},"age_days":399,"labels":["Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2025-08-10T08:25:40+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-12T12:22:52+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":85,"support_request":5,"confidence":75,"impact":45,"quick_win":6.75,"has_related_links":false},{"id":13804,"project_name":"craft-grammar","source":"github","external_id":"121","title":"feat(experimental): dictionary evaluation","author":"lengau","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-grammar/pull/121","summary":"Experimental dictionary evaluation for grammar handling when not in a list (IMAGECRAFT-43). Pending review, 4 unresolved comments, failing CI (lint, fast tests, min deps).","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"The PR is experimental and touches core grammar processing logic (_processor.py), with 4 unresolved review comments and failing CI checks (lint, fast tests, min deps). It needs a maintainer review to address the unresolved comments and fix CI failures before it can be considered for merge.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":22.0,"staleness":55,"complexity":45,"confidence":60},"age_days":374,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-09-03T17:42:10+00:00","updated_at":"2026-03-27T23:27:02+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":45,"support_request":null,"confidence":60,"impact":40,"quick_win":22.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":22123,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"962","title":"CI: create test workflow to build application docs upon changing `docs/common`","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/962","summary":"Feature request to add a CI workflow that builds downstream application docs when docs/common changes in craft-parts, to catch breakage before merge. Open, unlabelled, no maintainer response; only Jira-sync bot comments. docs/common is still actively maintained.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is a well-scoped CI feature request by a maintainer (lengau) but has no labels, no assignee, and no human maintainer acknowledgement — only two autogenerated Jira-sync bot comments (CRAFT-3888/3889). docs/common remains actively changed (e.g. #1685, #1649), so the request is still relevant and should be triaged rather than closed.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":55,"complexity":55,"confidence":70,"support_request":5},"age_days":611,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-01-09T19:24:13+00:00","updated_at":"2025-03-11T14:28:42+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":55,"support_request":5,"confidence":70,"impact":40,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":12653,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"420","title":"Rework PackageService API","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/issues/420","summary":"PackageService API rework: remove prime_dir from pack, remove metadata, make write_metadata abstract. prime_dir is now deprecated in pack but metadata and write_metadata(path) remain unchanged. No labels, comments, or assignee in ~2 years.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"Filed by maintainer lengau 747 days ago with zero comments, no labels, and no assignee. Code inspection shows partial progress: pack's prime_dir param is now marked DEPRECATED in favour of LifecycleService.project_info, but the metadata property (line 209) and write_metadata(path) with its concrete implementation (line 249) are unchanged, so the core rework is still outstanding. Needs triage to decide whether to proceed with the remaining breaking API changes or close as superseded by the deprecation path.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":13.5,"staleness":55,"complexity":70,"confidence":72,"support_request":5},"age_days":759,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-08-14T15:39:37+00:00","updated_at":"2025-05-23T17:26:47+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":70,"support_request":5,"confidence":72,"impact":45,"quick_win":13.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":1461,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2685","title":"`uv` plugin produces architecture-mislabeled charm on cross-build (`build-on: amd64`, `build-for: arm64|ppc64el|s390x`)","author":"UtkarshBhatthere","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/2685","summary":"uv plugin cross-build (build-on amd64, build-for arm64/ppc64el/s390x) silently packs a charm whose venv contains host-arch compiled wheels while manifest declares target arch. No maintainer response, no labels, 0 comments, 114 days old.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"No labels, no comments, no maintainer acknowledgement in 114 days, so it has not been triaged. The report is a well-evidenced real bug (x86-64 .so files inside an arm64-tagged charm), and the uv plugin code in craft-parts (uv sync with no --python-platform) confirms the mechanism, but the fix requires an architectural decision (fail-fast vs cross-resolve) and possibly a craft-parts change, so it needs maintainer triage rather than auto-closing.","scores":{"impact":75,"quick_win":22.5,"staleness":55,"complexity":70,"confidence":70,"support_request":5},"age_days":129,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-05-06T13:25:00+00:00","updated_at":"2026-05-06T13:26:48+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":70,"support_request":5,"confidence":70,"impact":75,"quick_win":22.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":5739,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"6185","title":"Add core26 support for the gnome extension","author":"mr-cal","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/6185","summary":"Placeholder task by a maintainer to add core26 support to the gnome extension, to be produced after the stable core26 base snap release. No comments or labels; an open PR (#6278) already targets this work and gnome.py still only supports core22/core24.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The author is a maintainer and the body explicitly states this is a placeholder task the Desktop team produces following the stable core26 base snap release, so inactivity is expected rather than staleness. PR #6278 (open) already implements core26 gnome support and gnome.py's get_supported_bases() still returns only ('core22', 'core24'), confirming the work is not yet merged and the issue remains relevant.","scores":{"impact":70,"quick_win":38.5,"staleness":55,"complexity":45,"confidence":85,"support_request":0},"age_days":150,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-04-15T13:38:34+00:00","updated_at":"2026-04-15T13:38:34+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":45,"support_request":0,"confidence":85,"impact":70,"quick_win":38.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":15464,"project_name":"craft-actions","source":"github","external_id":"48","title":"\"Publish snap\" action","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-actions/issues/48","summary":"Feature request for a GitHub Action equivalent to snapcraft upload --release, to complement the existing snapcraft/pack action. Triaged by maintainer, no implementation found in the repo. Last activity 215 days ago adding a retry requirement.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is labeled Status: Triaged, authored by a maintainer (lengau), and the repo remains actively maintained with recent commits (e.g., node-based rewrite of snapcraft/pack #100, modular setup actions #80). No publish/upload action exists in the codebase or README, and no related PRs were found. The 215-day activity gap is notable but the feature remains relevant and unimplemented.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":24.75,"staleness":55,"complexity":45,"confidence":78,"support_request":5},"age_days":268,"labels":["Type: Enhancement","Status: Triaged"],"created_at":"2025-12-18T20:32:38+00:00","updated_at":"2026-01-28T14:35:07+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":45,"support_request":5,"confidence":78,"impact":45,"quick_win":24.75,"has_related_links":false},{"id":1551,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2591","title":"Add reuse-packages documentation","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/2591","summary":"Docs enhancement to add a Charmcraft 'reuse packages between builds' how-to, mirroring Snapcraft's page. Triaged by a maintainer; the shared craft-application doc is still excluded from the build, so the page has not been added yet.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Labeled Status: Triaged with Type: Documentation/Enhancement and filed by maintainer lengau, so it is categorised and valid. The work is not done: docs/conf.py still lists common/craft-application/how-to-guides/reuse-packages-between-builds.rst under 'Excluded craft-application documents that need substitutions', and no Charmcraft howto page for reuse exists, so it should stay open.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":24.5,"staleness":55,"complexity":30,"confidence":70,"support_request":0},"age_days":190,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Documentation","Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2026-03-06T22:36:38+00:00","updated_at":"2026-03-06T22:36:56+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":30,"support_request":0,"confidence":70,"impact":35,"quick_win":24.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":1501,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2642","title":"Small bug in `charmcraft release` documentation","author":"Gu1nness","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/2642","summary":"charmcraft release docs show None for parameter names due to gen_cli_docs.py using action.metavar directly (None when unset); bug still present in current code, no maintainer response in 147 days","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"No labels, no maintainer comments, no assignee in 147 days. The bug is confirmed still present: gen_cli_docs.py line uses action.metavar directly which is None when not explicitly set, and ReleaseCommand.fill_parser does not set metavar on any argument. Trivial fix (use action.metavar or action.dest.upper()) but untriaged.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":17.0,"staleness":55,"complexity":15,"confidence":75,"support_request":0},"age_days":162,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-04-03T16:05:02+00:00","updated_at":"2026-04-03T16:05:02+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":15,"support_request":0,"confidence":75,"impact":20,"quick_win":17.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":5734,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"6190","title":"Add core26 support for the colcon plugin and extensions","author":"mr-cal","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/6190","summary":"Placeholder tracking task for adding core26 (Ubuntu 26.04) support to the colcon plugin and ROS 2 extensions. Core26 base support and the ros2-lyrical extensions have since landed, but no colcon-specific core26 work or PR is referenced; issue remains unlabelled with zero comments.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is a maintainer-authored placeholder with no labels, assignee, or comments, so it has not been triaged. Related work has landed since it was filed — PR #6053 added the ros2-lyrical (core26) extensions and #6315 fixed the ros 2 extension for core26 — but the colcon plugin itself still has no core26-specific handling (its get_build_packages only special-cases core22), so the task is not fully complete and should be assessed rather than closed.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":27.5,"staleness":55,"complexity":45,"confidence":60,"support_request":10},"age_days":149,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-04-16T17:27:10+00:00","updated_at":"2026-04-16T17:27:10+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":45,"support_request":10,"confidence":60,"impact":50,"quick_win":27.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":12016,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"1058","title":"feat: add prune instances","author":"Aeonoi","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/pull/1058","summary":"Adds a prune-instances command to craft-application (closes #991), +249/-2 across 9 files. Author updated the craft-providers pin per maintainer guidance, but has been silent since 2026-05-05; 28 unresolved review comments and several failing CI checks remain.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer mr-cal asked the author on 2026-05-05 to update pyproject.toml to the craft-providers 3.6.0 release, and the author has not responded for ~4 months (last activity 118 days ago), exceeding the 3-month window for unaddressed maintainer feedback. The feature itself is still needed (issue #991 remains open, no prune implementation exists in the repo), so this is a staleness close on author inactivity rather than irrelevance; 28 unresolved review comments and failing fast-test/lint/OSV-scanner checks compound the case.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":24.75,"staleness":55,"complexity":45,"confidence":75},"age_days":155,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-04-10T16:32:24+00:00","updated_at":"2026-05-05T14:47:00+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":45,"support_request":null,"confidence":75,"impact":45,"quick_win":24.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":3877,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"244","title":"\"Tracks\" management from charmcraft","author":"facundobatista","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/244","summary":"Feature request for track management commands (tracks, set-default-track) in charmcraft. Partially addressed: create-track command added, status shows tracks. set-default-track still missing, needs Charmhub API. Last touched 381 days ago by maintainer.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is a valid feature request that has been partially addressed (create-track command added in PR #2024, status command already displays tracks via list_releases), but the set-default-track command remains unimplemented and the docs/howto/manage-tracks.rst still notes 'there are plans to support it through the Charmcraft CLI.' The maintainer's last comment (2022-09-05) opened a Launchpad bug for the missing Charmhub API, indicating the blocker is external. The project has continued working on track management (PR #2395 refined create-track), so this remains relevant.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":22.0,"staleness":55,"complexity":45,"confidence":75,"support_request":10},"age_days":2033,"labels":[],"created_at":"2021-02-17T14:16:37+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:18:41+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":45,"support_request":10,"confidence":75,"impact":40,"quick_win":22.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":5840,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"6080","title":"Add pnpm plugin","author":"steinbro","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/6080","summary":"Feature request to add a pnpm plugin to snapcraft, modeled on the existing npm plugin in craft-parts. Labeled triaged with internal Jira ticket SNAPCRAFT-1306 created, but no implementation progress for about 6 months.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is labeled 'Status: Triaged' and an internal ticket (SNAPCRAFT-1306) was created, so it has been assessed and acknowledged by maintainers; a community member also seconded it. No pnpm plugin exists yet in snapcraft or craft-parts (no code or commits reference pnpm), so the request remains valid and actionable, with the npm plugin in craft-parts as a clear template. ~6 months of inactivity on a triaged feature request is not grounds to close.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":24.75,"staleness":55,"complexity":45,"confidence":80,"support_request":10},"age_days":192,"labels":["Status: Triaged"],"created_at":"2026-03-04T18:58:48+00:00","updated_at":"2026-03-05T14:25:47+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":45,"support_request":10,"confidence":80,"impact":45,"quick_win":24.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":13836,"project_name":"craft-grammar","source":"github","external_id":"89","title":"Unexpected behavior for multiple `to` statements","author":"mr-cal","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-grammar/issues/89","summary":"craft-grammar silently mishandles multiple `to` statements combined with `else`: armhf build yields [foo, baz] while riscv64 yields [bar], with no error or warning. Maintainer comment (2025-06-11) suggests supporting multiple `to` directives since `to` matches on AND criteria. No fix found in code or history; issue open, unlabelled.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"A maintainer (simondeziel) engaged on 2025-06-11 proposing to support multiple `to` directives, and the internal ticket CRAFT-4486 was created, so the issue is triaged and acknowledged. The current code in _processor.py still finalizes each `to` statement independently and attaches `else` only to the last active statement, confirming the reported behavior persists. The fix requires a design decision (error vs. proper multi-`to` handling) affecting grammar semantics, so it should remain open.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":17.5,"staleness":55,"complexity":65,"confidence":70,"support_request":5},"age_days":509,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-04-21T18:53:17+00:00","updated_at":"2025-06-11T20:42:37+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":65,"support_request":5,"confidence":70,"impact":50,"quick_win":17.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":5956,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"5960","title":"remote build: internal error when build is cancelled on launchpad","author":"sed-i","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/5960","summary":"Remote build crashes with MissingSchema when a build is cancelled on Launchpad: fetch_logs tries to download a log URL that is the string 'None'. Triaged by maintainer, upstream fix tracked in craft-application#996.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer @mr-cal confirmed this is a bug on 2026-01-28 and filed upstream craft-application#996, with an internal Jira ticket (SNAPCRAFT-1281) created. The issue is triaged and tracked, so it should remain open until the upstream fix lands. The current craft-application code has a `if not url` guard in fetch_logs, but the crash shows the URL is the literal string 'None', which the guard does not catch, so the fix is not yet verified.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"staleness":55,"complexity":40,"confidence":75,"support_request":5},"age_days":239,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Bug"],"created_at":"2026-01-17T07:26:10+00:00","updated_at":"2026-01-28T18:31:14+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":55,"complexity":40,"support_request":5,"confidence":75,"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":1482,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2664","title":"tests: add reproducer for reactive plugin missing .build.manifest (#872)","author":"lengau","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/pull/2664","summary":"Adds a failing unit test reproducing #872 (reactive plugin omits .build.manifest from .charm artifacts) plus a fix copying the manifest into install_dir. Pending review, 0 reviewers, CI green; branch appears stale vs main (-310 lines).","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"The work is complete (reproducer test plus fix per the Copilot comment claiming test_build_includes_build_manifest now passes) and CI is green, but it has 0 reviewers and no activity for 128 days. The +38/-310 diff stat suggests the branch is out of sync with main after reactive plugin changes like #2678, so a maintainer should review, rebase if needed, and land it; the underlying issue #872 is still open and main's _reactive.py still lacks the manifest copy.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":28.0,"staleness":50,"complexity":20,"confidence":75},"age_days":144,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-04-22T02:54:57+00:00","updated_at":"2026-04-22T04:22:36+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":50,"complexity":20,"support_request":null,"confidence":75,"impact":35,"quick_win":28.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":5874,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"6046","title":"docs: searching for build-packages yields no useful results","author":"zyga","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/6046","summary":"Snapcraft docs search for 'build-packages' returns poor results due to Sphinx default search treating hyphenated terms as separate words. Maintainer triaged, identified root cause, and deferred fix to a planned theme/search-provider migration.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer @medubelko triaged the issue, confirmed the root cause (Sphinx default search doesn't prioritise section names and splits 'build-packages' into two terms), and explicitly deferred the fix to a planned theme migration with a different search provider 'later this year.' The issue is acknowledged, scoped, and waiting on an external dependency (the migration), so it should remain open.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":13.75,"staleness":50,"complexity":45,"confidence":75,"support_request":10},"age_days":209,"labels":["Type: Bug","Type: Documentation","Type: Research"],"created_at":"2026-02-15T20:26:01+00:00","updated_at":"2026-03-23T20:52:33+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":50,"complexity":45,"support_request":10,"confidence":75,"impact":25,"quick_win":13.75,"has_related_links":false},{"id":47397,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2880","title":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/pull/2265","author":"thantzin7383y-bot","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/2880","summary":"PR #2265 merged: migrated YAML linting from yamllint to prettier across 22 files. Work is complete.","suggested_action":"close_not_a_bug","suggested_action_reason":"This PR has already been merged after approval by two reviewers, completing the migration from yamllint to prettier across 22 files with CI checks passing. The work is done and no further action is needed.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":18.75,"staleness":50,"complexity":25,"confidence":85,"support_request":0},"age_days":0,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-09-13T03:51:58+00:00","updated_at":"2026-09-13T03:51:58+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":50,"complexity":25,"support_request":0,"confidence":85,"impact":25,"quick_win":18.75,"has_related_links":false},{"id":46503,"project_name":"fetch-service","source":"github","external_id":"323","title":"Non SPDX compliant license expressions (and license identifiers)","author":"Vyom-Yadav","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/fetch-service/issues/323","summary":"Maintainer outlined an incremental plan to normalize non-SPDX license expressions and identifiers. Tracks compliance fixes for fetch-service SBOM generation.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"A maintainer has provided a detailed, step-by-step normalization plan and acknowledged the complexity. The issue is scoped and has maintainer buy-in, warranting it to stay open for tracking implementation.","scores":{"impact":80,"quick_win":40.0,"staleness":50,"complexity":50,"confidence":85,"support_request":0},"age_days":613,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-01-07T17:16:38+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:15:33+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":50,"complexity":50,"support_request":0,"confidence":85,"impact":80,"quick_win":40.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":5687,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"6239","title":"Update package repositories test","author":"mr-cal","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/6239","summary":"Task to update the package-repositories spread test for core26 once the deadsnakes and snappy-dev PPAs have resolute suites. The snappy-dev workaround is still in the code; a contributor volunteered 90 days ago, but the issue is unlabelled and unassigned.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is unlabelled and unassigned, and the only comment is a contributor's 2026-06-02 question ('can I work on this issue?') with no maintainer response. The workaround is still present in tests/spread/_common/package-repositories/task.yaml ('drop this section when the snappy-dev ppa has a resolute suite (#6239)'), so it remains relevant, but a maintainer needs to triage the volunteer and confirm the PPA suite status.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":18.75,"staleness":50,"complexity":25,"confidence":80,"support_request":0},"age_days":130,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-05-05T12:02:04+00:00","updated_at":"2026-06-02T20:59:52+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":50,"complexity":25,"support_request":0,"confidence":80,"impact":25,"quick_win":18.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":1480,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2666","title":"tests: add reproducer for fetch-lib unhelpful error message (#2204)","author":"lengau","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/pull/2666","summary":"Adds failing unit test reproducing #2204 (fetch-lib prints 'Library None not found in Charmhub') plus a fix using lib_data.full_name fallback. Pending review, 0 reviewers, CI passing.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"PR was opened by maintainer lengau to reproduce and fix #2204 (still open), includes a Copilot-generated fix (commit 4a4d0d4) and a failing test, with CI passing. However, it has had zero reviewer activity for 128 days and needs a maintainer to review and merge.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":22.75,"staleness":50,"complexity":35,"confidence":75},"age_days":144,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-04-22T03:05:00+00:00","updated_at":"2026-04-22T04:22:56+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":50,"complexity":35,"support_request":null,"confidence":75,"impact":35,"quick_win":22.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":1477,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2669","title":"tests: add reproducer for pack retaining deleted files between builds (#710)","author":"lengau","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/pull/2669","summary":"Adds failing reproducer test for #710 plus a fix (PartsLifecycle._clean_stale_parts) that cleans stale pulled files before each lifecycle run; test now passes. Awaiting review; several CI checks failing.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"PR is pending with 0 reviewers and has concrete failing CI: snap-tests on ubuntu-18.04 through ubuntu-26.04, snap-store-tests, and the Conventional Commits title check, which need to be addressed before landing. The fix is a local workaround for still-open upstream craft-parts#851, so a maintainer should weigh whether to merge now or wait for the upstream fix.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"staleness":50,"complexity":40,"confidence":75},"age_days":144,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-04-22T03:06:11+00:00","updated_at":"2026-04-22T05:18:52+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":50,"complexity":40,"support_request":null,"confidence":75,"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":5753,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"6169","title":"docs: fix support chart colours for dark mode","author":"Copilot","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/pull/6169","summary":"Docs-only CSS fix making support-chart Pro bars and milestone markers visible in dark mode via two CSS custom properties with light-mode fallbacks. Pending review, 0 comments, CI passing, no activity since creation ~143 days ago.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"The PR is a small, self-contained +19/-6 CSS change with CI passing and zero review activity for ~143 days, so it needs a maintainer to look at it. It is not stale-closable: the target file docs/_static/css/support-chart.css still contains the original #111/#56334b values at HEAD, and the underlying issue snapcraft#6161 remains open, so the fix is still applicable.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":22.5,"staleness":50,"complexity":10,"confidence":85},"age_days":155,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-04-10T13:27:14+00:00","updated_at":"2026-04-10T13:41:12+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":true,"staleness":50,"complexity":10,"support_request":null,"confidence":85,"impact":25,"quick_win":22.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":1459,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2687","title":"Should support keyrings.alt backend for headless systems","author":"panlinux","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/2687","summary":"charmcraft login on headless systems cannot persist credentials: no keyring is available, and the keyrings.alt backend is not bundled in the snap, so PYTHON_KEYRING_BACKEND crashes with ModuleNotFoundError. Unlabeled, no maintainer response.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, zero comments, and no maintainer acknowledgement in 113 days, so it has not been triaged. It remains valid: current store.py still relies on keyring with only an ephemeral fallback (from PR #1741), and keyrings.alt is absent from pyproject.toml and the snap, so the ModuleNotFoundError is still reproducible. Bundling python3-keyrings.alt (or an equivalent file-based backend) is a plausible fix but needs a maintainer decision on backend choice and passphrase handling for headless use.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":29.25,"staleness":50,"complexity":35,"confidence":80,"support_request":15},"age_days":128,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-05-07T19:58:14+00:00","updated_at":"2026-05-07T19:58:39+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":50,"complexity":35,"support_request":15,"confidence":80,"impact":45,"quick_win":29.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":12046,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"1028","title":"Add a way to run a spread test on only certain architectures","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/issues/1028","summary":"Enhancement to enable architecture-specific spread test filtering; arm64 system still commented out in spread.yaml. Triaged by maintainer, Jira ticket CRAFT-5055 created, no further activity in ~5.5 months.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is labeled 'Status: Triaged' and 'Type: Enhancement', was authored by maintainer lengau, and has an internal Jira ticket (CRAFT-5055). The ubuntu-24.04-arm-64 system remains commented out in spread.yaml, confirming the feature is unimplemented. At 168 days old with triage acknowledgement, it falls within the 6-month window and should remain open.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":22.0,"staleness":50,"complexity":45,"confidence":75,"support_request":5},"age_days":180,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2026-03-16T17:29:16+00:00","updated_at":"2026-03-16T17:30:02+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":50,"complexity":45,"support_request":5,"confidence":75,"impact":40,"quick_win":22.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":11848,"project_name":"debcraft","source":"github","external_id":"151","title":"[Feature] Add support for makeshdeps symbols file","author":"hector-cao","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/debcraft/issues/151","summary":"Feature request: debcraft generates shlibs files for shared library packages but lacks a makesymfile-equivalent to generate the symbols file. Confirmed unimplemented in current code; no maintainer response or labels in 126 days.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, zero comments, and no maintainer acknowledgement in 126 days, so it has never been triaged. I verified the request is still valid: the helpers registry only registers Makeshlibs (no makesymfile helper exists, and pickaxe search for 'symfile' finds no commits), so the feature is genuinely missing rather than implemented elsewhere.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":50,"complexity":60,"confidence":80,"support_request":5},"age_days":138,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-04-27T15:13:55+00:00","updated_at":"2026-04-27T15:13:55+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":50,"complexity":60,"support_request":5,"confidence":80,"impact":45,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":5839,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"6081","title":"Return different error codes for `snapcraft upload` responses","author":"mr-cal","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/6081","summary":"Enhancement to make `snapcraft upload` return distinct exit codes per store processing status (ready_to_release, being_processed, need_manual_review, processing errors) so CI workflows can handle results programmatically. Triaged, acknowledged by a maintainer, not yet implemented in client.py.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is triaged (Status: Triaged, Type: Enhancement labels), authored by a maintainer, and acknowledged by Jehan (2026-03-05) who endorsed the approach as long as codes are 'well documented and stable'. I verified the code in snapcraft/store/client.py notify_upload() still raises a generic SnapcraftError with no per-status exit codes, and no commit implements this, so the request remains valid and actionable.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":26.0,"staleness":50,"complexity":35,"confidence":82,"support_request":5},"age_days":192,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2026-03-04T21:51:09+00:00","updated_at":"2026-03-05T17:55:39+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":50,"complexity":35,"support_request":5,"confidence":82,"impact":40,"quick_win":26.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":4809,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"866","title":"The image entry point should be configurable, making Pebble optional","author":"petrutlucian94","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/866","summary":"Request to make Pebble optional by allowing a configurable OCI entrypoint in Rockcraft. The feature was implemented in Rockcraft 1.14.0 via the entrypoint-command key (PR #939), but the issue remains open and unlabelled.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The configurable entrypoint feature requested here was implemented in Rockcraft 1.14.0 via the entrypoint-command project key (PR #939). Release notes state this key 'defines the rock's OCI entrypoint, bypassing the default Pebble-powered entrypoint,' directly addressing the issue's core request. The issue is no longer applicable.","scores":{"impact":75,"quick_win":26.25,"staleness":50,"complexity":65,"confidence":88,"support_request":20},"age_days":507,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-04-23T11:45:24+00:00","updated_at":"2025-05-06T10:57:41+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":50,"complexity":65,"support_request":20,"confidence":88,"impact":75,"quick_win":26.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":5844,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"6076","title":"Differentiate “need manual review” status in \"snapcraft upload\" from errors","author":"Jehan","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/6076","summary":"Feature request to differentiate 'need manual review' exit code from errors in snapcraft upload for CI pipelines. Maintainer acknowledged with two proposed solutions (distinct exit codes via #6081, and --format json). No implementation yet.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer @mr-cal acknowledged the issue and proposed two concrete solutions (distinct return codes tracked in #6081, and a --format json option). The reporter confirmed the return-code approach as the priority. Issue #6081 is still open and triaged, so this remains a valid, scoped enhancement awaiting implementation.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":24.75,"staleness":50,"complexity":45,"confidence":78,"support_request":25},"age_days":193,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-03-03T21:50:39+00:00","updated_at":"2026-03-05T11:37:12+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":50,"complexity":45,"support_request":25,"confidence":78,"impact":45,"quick_win":24.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":5871,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"6049","title":"The documentation for `how-to/publishing/authenticate.rst` should at least specify one system keyring as an example","author":"linghengqian","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/6049","summary":"Docs request to add a concrete system keyring example (e.g. gnome-keyring install) to how-to/publishing/authenticate.rst for WSL users hitting 'No keyring found'. Triaged, acknowledged by a maintainer, and an open PR (#6073) is addressing it.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is labelled 'Status: Triaged' / 'Type: Documentation' and maintainer @bepri explicitly acknowledged it ('I agree this could be improved :)'), and open PR canonical/snapcraft#6073 ('docs: add gnome-keyring example for WSL users (fixes #6049)') is actively working on it, though it still has unresolved review comments. The doc file still lacks any concrete keyring example, so the request remains valid and in progress.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":31.5,"staleness":50,"complexity":10,"confidence":85,"support_request":10},"age_days":205,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Documentation"],"created_at":"2026-02-19T15:03:07+00:00","updated_at":"2026-02-19T16:09:21+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":50,"complexity":10,"support_request":10,"confidence":85,"impact":35,"quick_win":31.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":5676,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"6250","title":"feat: deprecation warning for snap_daemon system username","author":"lengau","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/pull/6250","summary":"Adds SystemUsernames pydantic model marking snap_daemon deprecated in JSON schema and emits runtime warning via craft-cli. Fixes snapcraft#5448. Pending review with 3 unresolved comments; CI failing on diff-schema and CLA.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"The PR has 3 unresolved review comments and failing CI checks including diff-schema (directly relevant to the schema deprecation change) and Canonical CLA. Target issue #5448 remains open, so the PR is still relevant but needs maintainer attention to address review feedback and CI failures before it can be merged.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":19.25,"staleness":50,"complexity":45,"confidence":75},"age_days":120,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-05-15T23:03:44+00:00","updated_at":"2026-05-15T23:09:39+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":50,"complexity":45,"support_request":null,"confidence":75,"impact":35,"quick_win":19.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":5565,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"109","title":"tests: spread tests fail intermittently","author":"mr-cal","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/109","summary":"Rockcraft spread tests intermittently fail because the docker snap daemon never starts in test VMs, and the retry loop is insufficient. Feb 2026 triage confirmed the same pattern is still in spread.yaml; a fix (diagnostics on failure) is suggested but no PR proposed.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is labelled Status: Triaged and a maintainer's 2026-02-26 comment explicitly confirms it is 'still present in-tree (not obsolete)', with the current spread.yaml still using the same 'retry -n 10 --wait 2 sh -c \"docker run --rm hello-world\"' pattern and no diagnostics on failure. A concrete remediation (capture snap services/logs/journalctl on retry exhaustion) is proposed but no PR exists, so it remains a valid, open CI-reliability bug.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":21.0,"staleness":50,"complexity":40,"confidence":85,"support_request":5},"age_days":1444,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Bug"],"created_at":"2022-09-29T16:20:44+00:00","updated_at":"2026-02-26T18:48:48+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":50,"complexity":40,"support_request":5,"confidence":85,"impact":35,"quick_win":21.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":21580,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1509","title":"ci: test on python 3.14","author":"lengau","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/pull/1509","summary":"Adds Python 3.14 to the qa.yaml fast-test matrix (removing 3.13) and updates pyproject.toml classifiers. Approved by one reviewer but has 5 unresolved review comments and 8 failing CI jobs; 3.14 is already present in main's fast-test matrix.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"The PR is approved by one reviewer but carries 5 unresolved review comments and 8 failing CI jobs (java-plugins, s390x, OSV-scanner) that a maintainer must resolve. Main's qa.yaml already lists 3.14 in fast-test-python-versions, so the core change is partially superseded, yet the pyproject.toml classifier update (still missing 3.14) and the 3.13 removal remain unmerged, keeping it relevant.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":21.25,"staleness":50,"complexity":15,"confidence":62},"age_days":177,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-03-20T03:47:39+00:00","updated_at":"2026-03-25T16:02:26+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":50,"complexity":15,"support_request":null,"confidence":62,"impact":25,"quick_win":21.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":41152,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1641","title":"uv plugin fails on core26: dispatch script uses system Python instead of venv","author":"zyga","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/1641","summary":"uv plugin fails on core26: craft-parts removes python symlinks from venv/bin/ and dispatch script falls back to system Python without venv packages","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no maintainer response, and 0 comments after 52 days. It presents a clear bug with reproduction steps and root cause analysis for the uv plugin failing on core26. The referenced issue #1580 was closed without resolution, suggesting this is an unresolved problem that needs proper triage and investigation.","scores":{"impact":55,"quick_win":30.25,"staleness":50,"complexity":45,"confidence":65,"support_request":15},"age_days":60,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-07-15T09:05:16+00:00","updated_at":"2026-07-15T09:05:16+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":50,"complexity":45,"support_request":15,"confidence":65,"impact":55,"quick_win":30.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":39780,"project_name":"craft-providers","source":"github","external_id":"381","title":"Improve integration tests","author":"mr-cal","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-providers/issues/381","summary":"Enhancement proposal to restructure integration tests, add timing, and create new test suites for bases verification. Open, awaiting implementation.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"This is a well-structured enhancement request from maintainer mr-cal with clear goals (moving lengthy tests to weekly jobs, adding timing, creating new integration test suites for bases). The issue has the 'Type: Enhancement' label and should remain on the backlog for future implementation.","scores":{"impact":60,"quick_win":27.0,"staleness":50,"complexity":55,"confidence":70,"support_request":0},"age_days":1123,"labels":["Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2023-08-16T16:09:26+00:00","updated_at":"2026-04-22T02:50:13+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":50,"complexity":55,"support_request":0,"confidence":70,"impact":60,"quick_win":27.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":15603,"project_name":"snapcraft-rocks","source":"github","external_id":"107","title":"chore(deps): update docker/login-action action to v3.7.0 (core22-8)","author":"renovate","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft-rocks/pull/107","summary":"Renovate bump of docker/login-action v3.5.0 to v3.7.0 on the core22-8 branch (1-line workflow change). Open 336 days, last activity 42 days ago, no comments; CI pending on lint and self-hosted build-rock jobs, CLA passing, automerge disabled.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"This is a trivial, still-relevant one-line action version bump: the core22-8 branch remains in the workflow trigger pattern (core2[24]-[78]), the prior v3.5.0 bump on the same branch (#90) was merged, and identical v3.7.0 updates are still open on sibling branches (#106, #108). It simply needs a maintainer to review and merge once the pending lint/build-rock CI jobs complete, since automerge is disabled.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":14.25,"staleness":50,"complexity":5,"confidence":70},"age_days":348,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-09-29T11:50:32+00:00","updated_at":"2026-07-21T01:30:31+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":50,"complexity":5,"support_request":null,"confidence":70,"impact":15,"quick_win":14.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":5609,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"65","title":"allow user configuration of the Pebble entrypoint binary","author":"cjdcordeiro","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/65","summary":"Feature request to let users configure the Pebble entrypoint snap channel/version and set a policy for user-supplied Pebble layers. Triaged 2026-02-26 as still valid; channel still hardcoded to pebble/latest/stable, no PR proposed.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"A maintainer (gcomneno) triaged this on 2026-02-26 and explicitly confirmed it 'still seems valid as a feature request,' documenting that rockcraft/pebble.py:368 still hardcodes stage-snaps to pebble/latest/stable and that define_pebble_layer() has no policy for user-supplied layers. It is a scoped, acknowledged feature request with no proposed PR, so it should remain open rather than be closed as stale.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":50,"complexity":60,"confidence":85,"support_request":10},"age_days":1468,"labels":[],"created_at":"2022-09-05T13:16:47+00:00","updated_at":"2026-02-26T07:21:22+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":50,"complexity":60,"support_request":10,"confidence":85,"impact":45,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":39456,"project_name":"craft-platforms","source":"github","external_id":"232","title":"docs: Document non-transitive equality behavior of DistroBase","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-platforms/issues/232","summary":"Documentation request to clarify non-transitive equality behavior in DistroBase.__eq__. Open 81 days with no labels or maintainer response.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is a valid documentation request from a maintainer (lengau) about the non-transitive equality behavior in DistroBase.__eq__, but it has no labels, no assignee, and no maintainer acknowledgment or comments. Per guidelines, unlabelled issues without maintainer response need triage before action is taken.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":27.0,"staleness":50,"complexity":10,"confidence":80,"support_request":0},"age_days":89,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-06-15T17:10:49+00:00","updated_at":"2026-06-15T17:10:49+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":50,"complexity":10,"support_request":0,"confidence":80,"impact":30,"quick_win":27.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":21595,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1494","title":"feat(go): Add `enable-check` build attribute and `go-testtags` property to run tests during build","author":"Copilot","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/pull/1494","summary":"Adds enable-check build attribute and go-testtags property to the go plugin to run unit tests during build, with docs and tests. Review status changes_requested (2 reviewers, 26 unresolved comments); author added requested integration tests 145 days ago.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"Review status is changes_requested from 2 reviewers with 26 unresolved comments, and the author's last action (145 days ago) was adding the integration tests @steinbro requested on 2026-03-12 (commit 3794057, test_go_enable_checks and test_go_enable_checks_failing_test), so a maintainer re-review of the follow-up is the next step. The feature is not yet in the main branch (no enable-check in go_plugin.py) and issue #1493 remains open, so the PR is still relevant rather than stale.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":27.0,"staleness":50,"complexity":40,"confidence":80},"age_days":185,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-03-12T00:15:27+00:00","updated_at":"2026-04-08T13:31:23+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":true,"staleness":50,"complexity":40,"support_request":null,"confidence":80,"impact":45,"quick_win":27.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":13369,"project_name":"craft-cli","source":"github","external_id":"371","title":"Multi-line permanent progress doesn't overwrite temporary progress","author":"jonathan-conder","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-cli/issues/371","summary":"craft-cli bug: a permanent multi-line progress message only clears the first line of a previous temporary progress, leaving residual text. A maintainer diagnosed the printer path and opened fix PR #445 (open, pending review); bug still present in main.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"A maintainer (gcomneno) triaged this, diagnosed the root cause in the printer's terminal output path, and opened fix PR #445 which is still open and pending review. The bug is confirmed reproducible with a clear reproducer and is not yet fixed in main (no matching commits found), so the issue remains valid and should stay open until the PR lands.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":16.5,"staleness":50,"complexity":45,"confidence":85,"support_request":0},"age_days":398,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-08-11T03:09:48+00:00","updated_at":"2026-04-23T04:00:48+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":50,"complexity":45,"support_request":0,"confidence":85,"impact":30,"quick_win":16.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":11845,"project_name":"debcraft","source":"github","external_id":"154","title":"ci: add copilot collections","author":"cmatsuoka","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/debcraft/pull/154","summary":"Adds Copilot Collections configuration (18 files, +3032 lines) to debcraft CI. Approved by 2 reviewers with all CI checks passing, but 11 unresolved review comments remain and no activity for ~3.5 months. Same change merged in sibling craft projects.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"The PR has 2 approvals and all CI checks passing, but 11 unresolved review comments remain with no author response since the last activity 104 days ago, so a maintainer needs to resolve or dismiss those comments before landing. It is not stale-irrelevant: the identical change was merged in sibling projects (craft-parts#1655, craft-application#1139) and no copilot collections config exists in debcraft's HEAD yet, so the work is still applicable.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":12.0,"staleness":50,"complexity":20,"confidence":72},"age_days":127,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-05-08T17:25:50+00:00","updated_at":"2026-05-19T18:10:21+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":50,"complexity":20,"support_request":null,"confidence":72,"impact":15,"quick_win":12.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":41833,"project_name":"imagecraft","source":"github","external_id":"381","title":"[Feature] Support s390x bootloader installation using zipl","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/imagecraft/issues/381","summary":"Feature request to add s390x bootloader support using zipl instead of GRUB. Unlabeled, no maintainer response after 46 days.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no comments, and no maintainer interaction after 46 days. While well-structured with implementation details, it requires architectural decisions about bootloader support for s390x and hasn't been categorized or prioritized by maintainers yet.","scores":{"impact":65,"quick_win":26.0,"staleness":45,"complexity":60,"confidence":55,"support_request":10},"age_days":53,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-07-21T15:45:33+00:00","updated_at":"2026-07-21T15:45:33+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":45,"complexity":60,"support_request":10,"confidence":55,"impact":65,"quick_win":26.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":21502,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1587","title":"Add a Patches Directive to Allow Custom Patching on top of the Source Tree","author":"bryanfraschetti","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/1587","summary":"Feature request for a patches directive to apply local patches to the source tree during the pull stage. A maintainer gave design feedback (prefer git-based approach, override-pull), and PR #1588 is open to implement it with unresolved review comments.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer steinbro triaged the request on 2026-05-20, validating the motivation while redirecting the design away from the Debian patch scheme toward git-ubuntu-style patching and override-pull, and an open PR (craft-parts#1588) explicitly implements this directive and closes the issue. The work is not done (PR has 6 unresolved comments and failing CI) and no patches directive exists in the codebase, so the issue remains valid and in progress rather than stale or moot.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":45,"complexity":60,"confidence":80,"support_request":10},"age_days":116,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-05-20T09:52:58+00:00","updated_at":"2026-05-20T20:33:54+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":45,"complexity":60,"support_request":10,"confidence":80,"impact":45,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":39772,"project_name":"craft-providers","source":"github","external_id":"172","title":"Check for docker upstream iptables installation for proper error message","author":"sergiusens","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-providers/issues/172","summary":"Enhancement to add docker iptables rule checking with proper error messages. Acknowledged by maintainer in April 2023, tracked as CRAFT-1683, no implementation yet.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"This is a valid enhancement request (labeled Type: Enhancement) that was acknowledged by maintainer @mr-cal on 2023-04-18 with tracking via CRAFT-1683. The issue remains relevant as Docker/LXD iptables conflicts still exist (documented in docs/explanation/index.rst). No implementation has been done yet, but the problem is real and the suggestion to add early validation with helpful error messages is reasonable.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":32.5,"staleness":45,"complexity":35,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":1405,"labels":["Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2022-11-07T16:24:08+00:00","updated_at":"2026-04-22T02:50:23+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":45,"complexity":35,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":50,"quick_win":32.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":21561,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1531","title":"docs: Add more explanation and/or examples to dump_plugin","author":"marcusboden","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/1531","summary":"Docs request for dump plugin page asking for usage examples (copying folders/files to a charm). Moved to craft-parts by maintainer; one example merged via PR #1547, broader PR #1597 open awaiting review.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is triaged (labels: Status: Triaged, Type: Documentation) and @lengau explicitly moved it to craft-parts, where it is being actively addressed: PR #1547 already merged an example into dump_plugin.rst and PR #1597 (open, awaiting review) adds further usage examples to resolve craft-parts#1531. Closing here would drop the tracking thread while the fix is still in flight.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":22.5,"staleness":45,"complexity":10,"confidence":80,"support_request":20},"age_days":164,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Documentation"],"created_at":"2026-04-02T08:23:30+00:00","updated_at":"2026-04-02T15:13:34+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":45,"complexity":10,"support_request":20,"confidence":80,"impact":25,"quick_win":22.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":13362,"project_name":"craft-cli","source":"github","external_id":"378","title":"Broken pipe when trimming lines (head)","author":"sergiusens","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-cli/issues/378","summary":"BrokenPipeError traceback when piping snapcraft output to an early-closing consumer like `head -n1`. Fix is scoped to ignoring BrokenPipeError in the printer's stream handling; draft PR #443 is open and awaiting review.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The bug is real and still present at HEAD (no BrokenPipeError handling exists in craft_cli/printer.py or messages.py), and contributor gcomneno has an open draft PR (#443) that directly fixes it, so the issue is acknowledged and in progress. Last activity was ~4 months ago with the PR awaiting maintainer review, which is moderately stale but not stale enough to close; the appropriate next step is review/merge of the PR.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":20.0,"staleness":45,"complexity":20,"confidence":85,"support_request":5},"age_days":387,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-08-21T12:59:22+00:00","updated_at":"2026-04-22T12:28:58+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":45,"complexity":20,"support_request":5,"confidence":85,"impact":25,"quick_win":20.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":5941,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"5975","title":"craftctl support for plugs","author":"pinaraf","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/5975","summary":"Feature request to add craftctl set support for plugs in snapcraft, enabling dynamic plug configuration at build time. Triaged by maintainer who proposed 3 options; reporter has workaround (option 1) and agreed to wait for implementation next cycle. No implementation yet.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Issue is triaged (labeled 'Status: Triaged', 'Type: Enhancement') with active maintainer engagement: mr-cal discussed 3 implementation options and said 'I'll add it to our list' (2026-01-29). Reporter confirmed workaround exists and agreed to wait. Last activity 201 days ago is within the 6-month window for acknowledged issues. The feature is scoped (craftctl set apps.my-app.plugs) and leverages existing project variable infrastructure in craft-parts.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":22.5,"staleness":45,"complexity":55,"confidence":75,"support_request":0},"age_days":233,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2026-01-22T14:57:42+00:00","updated_at":"2026-02-11T20:45:46+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":45,"complexity":55,"support_request":0,"confidence":75,"impact":50,"quick_win":22.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":41413,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1652","title":"fix(parts): run override build on working subdir","author":"soumyaDghosh","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/pull/1652","summary":"Fixes override build to run on working subdir. Reviewer acknowledges it's a bug but flags it as load-bearing and requests configurability before merging. Waiting for additional maintainer input.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"Reviewer @lengau acknowledges this is a real bug but notes the change is load-bearing and needs to be made configurable before merging. They've requested input from @tigarmo and @cmatsuoka, so the PR requires further maintainer review before a decision can be made.","scores":{"impact":55,"quick_win":35.75,"staleness":45,"complexity":35,"confidence":75},"age_days":57,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-07-17T19:30:17+00:00","updated_at":"2026-07-22T14:22:42+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":45,"complexity":35,"support_request":null,"confidence":75,"impact":55,"quick_win":35.75,"has_related_links":false},{"id":41526,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"6364","title":"Icons resolved from icon theme still prints error messages","author":"lunacd","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/6364","summary":"Bug where icons resolved from hicolor theme still print error messages. Maintainer acknowledged and working on fix with tests.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is a valid bug in snapcraft/parts/desktop_file.py where the code sets the resolved icon path but then falls through to check the original icon name, printing a false error. Maintainer @soumyaDghosh acknowledged the issue 44 days ago and stated they have a solution but want to add tests first, indicating active work.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":29.75,"staleness":45,"complexity":15,"confidence":85,"support_request":0},"age_days":56,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-07-18T19:49:33+00:00","updated_at":"2026-07-23T14:12:23+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":45,"complexity":15,"support_request":0,"confidence":85,"impact":35,"quick_win":29.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":39339,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"1094","title":"fix(remote): deduplicate artifact names in remote-build success message","author":"kirtisingh05","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/pull/1094","summary":"Fixes duplicate artifact names in remote-build success message by deduplicating via set comprehension. Author acknowledges current approach masks root cause and is working on filtering by build request ID instead.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The PR author actively acknowledged review feedback (2 unresolved comments) and stated they are working on a better fix that filters by build request ID rather than deduplicating filenames. Last activity was 6 days ago, indicating ongoing development. The PR addresses open issue #1093 and has not been superseded.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":19.25,"staleness":45,"complexity":45,"confidence":75},"age_days":88,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-06-16T20:40:42+00:00","updated_at":"2026-08-29T21:58:18+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":45,"complexity":45,"support_request":null,"confidence":75,"impact":35,"quick_win":19.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":5922,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"5995","title":"Documentation doesn't describe which keys can use advanced grammar","author":"waveform80","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/5995","summary":"Docs gap: advanced-grammar reference never lists which snapcraft.yaml keys support the syntax (only hinted via examples). Maintainer confirmed the omission and pointed to a separate feature request for broader key coverage; doc fix still pending.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer @mr-cal explicitly acknowledged the gap (\"You are right - this isn't documented\") and the issue is labelled Status: Triaged / Type: Documentation, so it is triaged and valid. The current docs/reference/advanced-grammar.rst still only shows build-packages/build-environment examples with no key list, so the fix is not yet done. The related feature request (canonical/snapcraft#5469 for package-repositories) is a separate scope, not a fix for this doc gap.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":29.75,"staleness":45,"complexity":15,"confidence":80,"support_request":20},"age_days":226,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Documentation"],"created_at":"2026-01-29T15:54:28+00:00","updated_at":"2026-02-18T23:32:41+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":45,"complexity":15,"support_request":20,"confidence":80,"impact":35,"quick_win":29.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":39795,"project_name":"craft-providers","source":"github","external_id":"646","title":"Consider switching from using the LXD CLI to pylxd","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-providers/issues/646","summary":"Enhancement to replace LXD CLI with pylxd for faster, more reliable LXD interaction. Partially adopted (commit #874). Decision pending LXD 6.x migration.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has been triaged (labeled as Enhancement) and has maintainer engagement across multiple comments. A clear path forward exists: @steinbro (2026-01-15) suggested revisiting when migrating from LXD 5.x to 6.x. Partial progress has been made (commit #874 uses pylxd for instance existence checks), and the issue remains relevant pending LXD 6.x LTS release.","scores":{"impact":55,"quick_win":19.25,"staleness":45,"complexity":65,"confidence":65,"support_request":15},"age_days":744,"labels":["Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2024-08-30T04:04:28+00:00","updated_at":"2026-04-22T02:48:42+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":45,"complexity":65,"support_request":15,"confidence":65,"impact":55,"quick_win":19.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":46462,"project_name":"fetch-service","source":"github","external_id":"589","title":"Pass-through mode","author":"steinbro","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/fetch-service/issues/589","summary":"Feature proposal to add pass-through mode as a third mode (after strict and permissive) for async package scanning to improve Fetch Service performance. Triaged and under maintainer discussion.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is triaged (Status: Triaged label) and has active maintainer discussion — steinbro (maintainer) commented 167 days ago clarifying that pass-through mode would be a third mode alongside strict and permissive, with the goal of sharing code paths. This is a valid architectural feature proposal, not a bug or support request. Confidence is moderate because while the proposal is clear, there's no indication of active implementation work or a timeline.","scores":{"impact":70,"quick_win":17.5,"staleness":45,"complexity":75,"confidence":65,"support_request":10},"age_days":173,"labels":["Status: Triaged"],"created_at":"2026-03-23T22:31:52+00:00","updated_at":"2026-03-25T23:25:26+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":45,"complexity":75,"support_request":10,"confidence":65,"impact":70,"quick_win":17.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":39099,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"6287","title":"remote-build: support build paths","author":"jnsgruk","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/6287","summary":"Enhancement to add --project-dir support for remote-build command, allowing users to specify build paths when multiple snapcraft.yaml files exist. Issue is triaged and assigned to a contributor after upstream dependency was resolved.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is triaged with a clear scope and has been assigned to contributor @Tejas-Raj01 who confirmed readiness to implement it. The upstream dependency (craft-application#1106) was resolved on 2026-07-21 per maintainer @mr-cal's comment, and the contributor was instructed to start work immediately.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":17.5,"staleness":45,"complexity":65,"confidence":75,"support_request":5},"age_days":95,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2026-06-10T08:27:08+00:00","updated_at":"2026-07-22T11:38:16+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":45,"complexity":65,"support_request":5,"confidence":75,"impact":50,"quick_win":17.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":40316,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"6322","title":"core26: YAML error messages refer to core24","author":"steinbro","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/6322","summary":"Error message for unsupported 'architectures' key incorrectly says 'core24' when using base 'core26'. Triaged bug with clear reproduction.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"This is a valid, triaged bug: `Core26Project` inherits from `Core24Project`, and the hardcoded error message in `snapcraft/models/project.py:2479` always says 'core24' regardless of the actual base. The fix requires making the error message dynamic or overriding the `architectures` field in `Core26Project` with a corrected message.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":40.0,"staleness":45,"complexity":20,"confidence":85,"support_request":0},"age_days":71,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Bug"],"created_at":"2026-07-03T19:44:57+00:00","updated_at":"2026-07-13T14:40:39+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":45,"complexity":20,"support_request":0,"confidence":85,"impact":50,"quick_win":40.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":6733,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"5146","title":"Snap: Snapcraft currently relies on `libapt` during configure","author":"Meulengracht","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/5146","summary":"Snapcraft's configure hook failed to install because importing snapcraft transitively imported apt (via snapcraft_legacy), requiring libapt from the base snap. Maintainers confirmed libapt will be removed in core26; the legacy apt-importing code path has since been removed from the codebase.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainers actively engaged as recently as 215 days ago (alfonsosanchezbeato confirmed core26 still plans to remove libapt), and the issue is triaged with a 'Needs information' label. The specific top-level apt import from snapcraft_legacy appears removed (no 'import apt' matches, snapcraft_legacy deleted in commits ffb164b7a/995f0a3bc), but the underlying requirement that the configure hook work without base libapt on core26 remains unverified, so it should stay open pending confirmation.","scores":{"impact":55,"quick_win":24.75,"staleness":45,"complexity":55,"confidence":60,"support_request":10},"age_days":663,"labels":["Status: Needs information"],"created_at":"2024-11-18T10:39:55+00:00","updated_at":"2026-01-28T19:32:51+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":45,"complexity":55,"support_request":10,"confidence":60,"impact":55,"quick_win":24.75,"has_related_links":false},{"id":40502,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"6326","title":"core26: apt update fails due to armhf being added to the architectures list on arm64 platforms","author":"IsaacJT","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/6326","summary":"core26 snap builds on arm64 fail because craft-archives adds armhf to architectures list, causing apt update to fail with 404 errors from archive.ubuntu.com","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is triaged (Status: Triaged label present), has active maintainer engagement (@mr-cal responded on 2026-07-08 with an upstream issue reference and workaround), and blocks core26 snap builds on arm64 platforms. The upstream fix is tracked in craft-archives#230.","scores":{"impact":75,"quick_win":45.0,"staleness":45,"complexity":40,"confidence":85,"support_request":15},"age_days":67,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Bug"],"created_at":"2026-07-07T11:29:56+00:00","updated_at":"2026-07-09T10:01:56+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":45,"complexity":40,"support_request":15,"confidence":85,"impact":75,"quick_win":45.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":4188,"project_name":"imagecraft","source":"github","external_id":"279","title":"Support for manifest generation","author":"rthill91","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/imagecraft/issues/279","summary":"Feature request to add manifest generation support via create_manifest option in imagecraft.yaml for Ubuntu image builds. Triaged but no implementation started.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"This is a valid, triaged feature request (Status: Triaged label) for manifest generation support in imagecraft builds. The issue has been acknowledged by maintainers with an internal ticket (IMAGECRAFT-116) and a follow-up comment requesting additional features (zsync, signed checksums). No implementation work has started, but the feature is clearly scoped and relevant to the project's goals for Ubuntu image building.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":22.5,"staleness":45,"complexity":55,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":198,"labels":["Status: Triaged"],"created_at":"2026-02-26T18:26:27+00:00","updated_at":"2026-09-07T21:31:25+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":45,"complexity":55,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":50,"quick_win":22.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":21533,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1556","title":"Fix: deleted files from local sources now removed from part src directory on update","author":"Copilot","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/pull/1556","summary":"Adds a .craft-parts-source-manifest to LocalSource so update() removes files deleted from the source, fixing open issue #851. Author revised the approach after maintainer feedback; review pending with 0 reviewers and only the CLA check passing.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer @lengau flagged that the original approach would delete intermediate objects and force rebuilds; the author revised it in bf342c6 to use a source manifest, but the PR still has 0 formal reviewers and review is pending. Issue #851 remains open and the current local_source.py has no manifest logic, so the fix is unmerged and needs a maintainer to review the revised approach (noting a prior attempt was reverted in #132).","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":20.0,"staleness":45,"complexity":60,"confidence":70},"age_days":144,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-04-22T05:20:17+00:00","updated_at":"2026-04-22T06:14:53+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":true,"staleness":45,"complexity":60,"support_request":null,"confidence":70,"impact":50,"quick_win":20.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":40931,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"6336","title":"Snapcraft 9: snapcraftctl errors in core22 snaps","author":"ThibF","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/6336","summary":"Regression in snapcraft 9: core22 snaps using snapcraftctl in override-build fail validation. Maintainer confirmed as a regression.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer @mr-cal confirmed this is a regression in snapcraft 9.0.1 and reproduced it. The bug is in snapcraft/models/project.py line 2159: the validator checks info.data.get(\"build-base\") with a hyphen, but pydantic v2 stores field names with underscores (build_base), so the check always returns None and incorrectly rejects snapcraftctl for core22 snaps. Fix is a one-line change.","scores":{"impact":75,"quick_win":67.5,"staleness":45,"complexity":10,"confidence":85,"support_request":0},"age_days":61,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Bug"],"created_at":"2026-07-13T12:55:31+00:00","updated_at":"2026-07-13T16:16:35+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":45,"complexity":10,"support_request":0,"confidence":85,"impact":75,"quick_win":67.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":6668,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"5211","title":"Docs: Cover the minimum versions for build providers","author":"medubelko","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/5211","summary":"Documentation task to add minimum LXD/Multipass build-provider versions to snapcraft system-requirements and core22 migration docs. Triaged with maintainer buy-in; blocked on craft-providers providing consumable docs, so a volunteer stepped back in March 2026.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainers triaged this (labels: Status: Triaged, Type: Documentation) and @mr-cal endorsed it ('great idea'), but on 2026-03-25 clarified it is not ready because craft-providers 'isn't setup for consumable documentation' and the fix must work across all craft apps; volunteer @gcomneno stepped back pending that. The doc gap is still real (system-requirements.rst lists no provider versions), so it stays open but is blocked on an external dependency.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":45,"complexity":40,"confidence":80,"support_request":5},"age_days":600,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Documentation","Status: Needs information"],"created_at":"2025-01-20T21:36:52+00:00","updated_at":"2026-03-25T19:54:23+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":45,"complexity":40,"support_request":5,"confidence":80,"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":41902,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"1143","title":"LifecycleService should turn on part_builld_subdir for future bases (e.g. ubuntu 27.04+)","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/issues/1143","summary":"Enable part_build_subdir in LifecycleService for Ubuntu 27.04+ bases, pending craft-parts PR #1652 merge. No maintainer response yet.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no assignee, and zero maintainer comments after 45 days. It is blocked by craft-parts#1652 which is still open, so it cannot be acted upon until that PR merges. A maintainer should label it as blocked_by and assign it for follow-up once the dependency resolves.","scores":{"impact":60,"quick_win":42.0,"staleness":45,"complexity":30,"confidence":75,"support_request":10},"age_days":52,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-07-22T14:28:14+00:00","updated_at":"2026-07-22T14:28:14+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":45,"complexity":30,"support_request":10,"confidence":75,"impact":60,"quick_win":42.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":15893,"project_name":"starbase","source":"github","external_id":"352","title":"CI to check pre-commit updates from renovate","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/starbase/issues/352","summary":"CI should run pre-commit run --all-files when renovate updates .pre-commit-config.yaml. Issue is 565 days old but had a Copilot research comment 19 days ago confirming the gap still exists. A prior attempt to add --all-files was walked back (commit 2443e63), so the solution needs rethinking.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The Copilot research comment from 19 days ago explicitly confirms no CI job runs pre-commit run --all-files and that make lint bypasses the pre-commit framework entirely. The walk-back commit 2443e63 (fix: walk back pre-commit all-files) shows the naive approach was rejected, but the underlying gap remains. The issue is a legitimate CI improvement request that needs a maintainer to decide on the right approach.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":21.0,"staleness":45,"complexity":40,"confidence":65,"support_request":10},"age_days":577,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-02-12T18:26:58+00:00","updated_at":"2026-08-12T20:54:45+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":45,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":65,"impact":35,"quick_win":21.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":41372,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1650","title":"docs: group plugins by language","author":"GreyViperTooth","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/pull/1650","summary":"Groups plugins by language in docs/reference/plugins.rst. Simplified per maintainer feedback to docs-only change. Waiting for second reviewer (medubelko) to assess fit with ongoing docs changes.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"The PR was simplified per maintainer @steinbro's feedback to a docs-only change (dropping source reorganization). @steinbro looped in @medubelko on 2026-07-22 to assess how this fits with other ongoing docs changes. It is awaiting that second reviewer's input before proceeding.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":21.25,"staleness":45,"complexity":15,"confidence":75},"age_days":58,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-07-17T05:20:17+00:00","updated_at":"2026-07-22T12:30:09+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":45,"complexity":15,"support_request":null,"confidence":75,"impact":25,"quick_win":21.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":39821,"project_name":"craft-providers","source":"github","external_id":"391","title":"LXD issue when build multiple charms in parallel","author":"beliaev-maksim","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-providers/issues/391","summary":"LXD race condition causing parallel charm build failures; reopened by maintainer after resurfacing in modern Charmcraft","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue was reopened by maintainer @lengau on 2025-02-06 because @PietroPasotti is seeing the same LXD error in modern Charmcraft, with recent CI evidence from canonical/parca-agent-operator#55. This is a valid bug that was previously fixed but has resurfaced, and a maintainer has explicitly reactivated it.","scores":{"impact":75,"quick_win":26.25,"staleness":45,"complexity":65,"confidence":75,"support_request":10},"age_days":1107,"labels":["Type: Bug"],"created_at":"2023-09-01T20:24:39+00:00","updated_at":"2026-04-22T02:48:00+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":45,"complexity":65,"support_request":10,"confidence":75,"impact":75,"quick_win":26.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":6365,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"5514","title":"extensions/gnome: Add sdk include directories to C_INCLUDE_PATH","author":"3v1n0","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/pull/5514","summary":"Adds GNOME SDK include dirs to C_INCLUDE_PATH in the gnome extension so headers like xkbcommon/xkbcommon.h resolve. Approved by one reviewer, but maintainers (lengau, bepri) deferred it to core26/Snapcraft 9 over core24 backward-compat risk; one CI job failing.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainers bepri and lengau explicitly deferred this to Snapcraft 9/core26 rather than rejecting it, and the 'Needs information' label plus the author's active reply (2025-10-01) show it is under discussion, not dead. The change is still relevant (no C_INCLUDE_PATH exists in the current gnome.py) and is intentionally held for a future base, so it should stay open pending the core26 work.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":27.0,"staleness":45,"complexity":40,"confidence":80},"age_days":474,"labels":["Status: Needs information"],"created_at":"2025-05-27T03:06:20+00:00","updated_at":"2025-10-08T17:10:04+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":45,"complexity":40,"support_request":null,"confidence":80,"impact":45,"quick_win":27.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":39732,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"1105","title":"remote-build should be asynchronous by default","author":"steinbro","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/issues/1105","summary":"Feature request to add --detach/--bg flag for asynchronous remote-build. Discussed among maintainers but not yet implemented.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"This is a feature request that has been discussed by maintainers (@steinbro, @jnsgruk) who agreed a --bg/--detach flag would be useful, but no implementation has started and the issue has no labels. The last maintainer comment was 49 days ago requesting more context on use cases. Needs triage to determine implementation priority and design.","scores":{"impact":55,"quick_win":19.25,"staleness":45,"complexity":65,"confidence":75,"support_request":0},"age_days":79,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-06-25T21:06:00+00:00","updated_at":"2026-07-17T12:19:02+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":45,"complexity":65,"support_request":0,"confidence":75,"impact":55,"quick_win":19.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":46494,"project_name":"fetch-service","source":"github","external_id":"329","title":"Is the support complete for `rock` images? (potentially new inspector required)","author":"Vyom-Yadav","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/fetch-service/issues/329","summary":"Fetch service lacks OCI image inspector for rockcraft builds; maintainer acknowledged and confirmed OCI inspector support is planned.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer @cmatsuoka acknowledged the issue on 2025-01-28 and explicitly stated 'support for an OCI image inspector is planned.' This is a legitimate feature gap that has been triaged and is on the roadmap, not a stale or unsupported request.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":17.5,"staleness":45,"complexity":65,"confidence":75,"support_request":15},"age_days":594,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-01-27T06:57:38+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:15:39+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":45,"complexity":65,"support_request":15,"confidence":75,"impact":50,"quick_win":17.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":6913,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"4965","title":"Document using Snapcraft under WSL","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/4965","summary":"Docs request to add detailed WSL setup steps (enable systemd, snapd, reboot) to the Snapcraft setup guide. Triaged; maintainer wants a WSL smoketest before endorsing. Current docs have a basic WSL tab but lack the special procedures.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer mr-cal acknowledged on 2024-11-21 with a specific prerequisite: \"I'd like to have a smoketest with WSL before we officially endorse it with documentation.\" The current set-up-snapcraft.rst has a Windows tab with only \"install WSL2\" and \"snap install snapcraft --classic\", missing the systemd/snapd enablement steps the issue requests. WSL2 is listed as a supported platform in system-requirements.rst and the snapcraft 9.0 release notes direct Windows users to the WSL setup docs, making this a valid gap.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":31.5,"staleness":45,"complexity":30,"confidence":78,"support_request":10},"age_days":759,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Documentation"],"created_at":"2024-08-14T15:33:38+00:00","updated_at":"2026-03-20T17:36:00+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":45,"complexity":30,"support_request":10,"confidence":78,"impact":45,"quick_win":31.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":16354,"project_name":"starflow","source":"github","external_id":"28","title":"Use osv-scanner to scan `uv.lock` files","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/starflow/issues/28","summary":"Enhancement to add osv-scanner scanning of uv.lock files in the scan-python workflow. Blocked by google/osv-scanner#1406 which is now resolved; implementation pending osv-scanner version update via iosifache/osv-scanner-snap#3.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is triaged (Status: Triaged label) and the blocking dependency (google/osv-scanner#1406) has been resolved per the May 2025 comment. The remaining work is updating the osv-scanner version via the referenced snap PR, making this a concrete, actionable enhancement that should stay open until implemented.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":35.0,"staleness":45,"complexity":30,"confidence":70,"support_request":0},"age_days":642,"labels":["Type: Enhancement","Status: Triaged"],"created_at":"2024-12-09T23:47:13+00:00","updated_at":"2025-05-21T07:53:43+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":45,"complexity":30,"support_request":0,"confidence":70,"impact":50,"quick_win":35.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":43051,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"1321","title":"chore(snap): remove libapt-pkg-dev since we no longer build python-apt","author":"copilot-swe-agent","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/pull/1321","summary":"Removes unnecessary libapt-pkg-dev build dependency from snapcraft.yaml since python-apt is installed as a stage-package. Draft PR pending spread test fix.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"This is a draft PR with a specific blocker — the maintainer @lengau noted the spread test issue must be resolved before unmarking as draft. The change itself is valid: libapt-pkg-dev is only needed to compile python-apt from source, but the snapcraft.yaml already has a python3-apt part that installs it as a stage-package. The PR has maintainer engagement and a clear path forward.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":23.75,"staleness":45,"complexity":5,"confidence":85},"age_days":31,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-08-12T19:00:53+00:00","updated_at":"2026-08-13T00:33:01+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":45,"complexity":5,"support_request":null,"confidence":85,"impact":25,"quick_win":23.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":43081,"project_name":"imagecraft","source":"github","external_id":"404","title":"Pre-existing lint/type-check failures: mypy no-any-return in grubutil.py, pyright reportUnusedImport/reportMatchNotExhaustive/reportArgumentType","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/imagecraft/issues/404","summary":"Tracks pre-existing mypy and pyright lint/type-check failures on main: no-any-return in grubutil.py, unused import in models/__init__.py, non-exhaustive match in image.py, and argument type errors in tests.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no assignee, and zero maintainer comments after 24 days. It is a well-structured bug report with specific file/line references and error messages, but no maintainer has yet acknowledged or prioritized it. The four reported issues are real type-check failures (e.g., non-exhaustive match on PartitionSchema missing HYBRID case in image.py:301-303, unused BaseVolume import in models/__init__.py:27) that should be triaged and fixed.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":37.5,"staleness":45,"complexity":25,"confidence":85,"support_request":0},"age_days":31,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-08-12T21:11:58+00:00","updated_at":"2026-08-12T21:11:58+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":45,"complexity":25,"support_request":0,"confidence":85,"impact":50,"quick_win":37.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":43083,"project_name":"imagecraft","source":"github","external_id":"403","title":"CI: zizmor flags unpinned GitHub Actions in check-renovate.yaml / release-publish.yaml","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/imagecraft/issues/403","summary":"Tracking issue for zizmor flags on unpinned GitHub Actions in starbase-owned workflow files; awaiting triage","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no maintainer comments, and no assignee after 24 days. It is a legitimate tracking issue for upstream work in canonical/starbase (pinning action versions), but requires maintainer acknowledgment and prioritization before any action can be taken.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":32.0,"staleness":45,"complexity":20,"confidence":60,"support_request":0},"age_days":31,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-08-12T21:11:47+00:00","updated_at":"2026-08-12T21:11:47+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":45,"complexity":20,"support_request":0,"confidence":60,"impact":40,"quick_win":32.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":43090,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1667","title":"fix(sources): retry HTTP(S) downloads on transient failures","author":"lengau","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/pull/1667","summary":"Adds retry-with-backoff to SourceHandler.download() for transient HTTP(S) failures, with security hardening against symlink TOCTOU attacks. CI passing, awaiting human review.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"The PR has passing CI and multiple rounds of AI-generated reviews confirming correctness, but has zero human reviewers after 24 days. It is a maintainer-authored fix addressing transient download failures (#1666) with substantive changes including retry logic, checksum-before-replace ordering, and symlink TOCTOU hardening — all warrant human maintainer review before merge.","scores":{"impact":55,"quick_win":19.25,"staleness":45,"complexity":65,"confidence":70},"age_days":31,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-08-12T21:55:34+00:00","updated_at":"2026-08-12T23:51:27+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":45,"complexity":65,"support_request":null,"confidence":70,"impact":55,"quick_win":19.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":43101,"project_name":"imagecraft","source":"github","external_id":"407","title":"OSV-scanner findings: outdated transitive dependencies (cryptography, httplib2, python-apt, setuptools)","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/imagecraft/issues/407","summary":"OSV-scanner reports outdated transitive dependencies (cryptography, httplib2, python-apt, setuptools). Issue has no maintainer response; referenced file doesn't exist in current repo layout.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no maintainer response, no labels, and no assignee after 24 days. The referenced file `requirements/uv-requirements.--all-extras.txt` does not exist in the current repo layout, and `uv.lock` already shows `cryptography` at version 50.0.0 (the fixed version), suggesting partial resolution. A maintainer needs to validate whether the issue is still relevant or if it has been addressed.","scores":{"impact":75,"quick_win":56.25,"staleness":45,"complexity":25,"confidence":60,"support_request":15},"age_days":31,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-08-12T22:48:14+00:00","updated_at":"2026-08-12T22:48:14+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":45,"complexity":25,"support_request":15,"confidence":60,"impact":75,"quick_win":56.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":44238,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"6397","title":"feat: partitions always enabled","author":"cmatsuoka","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/pull/6397","summary":"Small change to always enable partitions unconditionally. No reviews, no comments, 16 days old, CI passing.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"This PR (+9/-10 lines) is authored by maintainer cmatsuoka and has no reviews or comments after 16 days. The change appears to remove the conditional check for components in _enable_craft_parts_features() to always enable partitions, which is a behavioral shift from the current conditional logic. Without reviewer input or a linked issue explaining the rationale, maintainer review is needed before proceeding.","scores":{"impact":55,"quick_win":41.25,"staleness":45,"complexity":25,"confidence":55},"age_days":23,"labels":["PR: Run Manual Spread"],"created_at":"2026-08-20T20:45:29+00:00","updated_at":"2026-08-20T23:06:16+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":45,"complexity":25,"support_request":null,"confidence":55,"impact":55,"quick_win":41.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":44299,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"1341","title":"fix: use major-version docs URLs in init output","author":"shAsh-cy","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/pull/1341","summary":"Bumps craft-application from 7.1.0 to 7.2.0 to fix 404 URLs in rockcraft init --profile output. Includes regression test and docs exclusion. Unreviewed, 15 days old.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"This is a well-documented, low-complexity dependency bump that fixes a real bug (404 URLs from rockcraft init --profile, issue #1312). It includes a regression test, passes lint and test suites, and has clear reasoning. However, it has had zero reviewer engagement in 15 days, so a maintainer review is needed before merging.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":42.5,"staleness":45,"complexity":15,"confidence":75},"age_days":23,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-08-21T07:52:50+00:00","updated_at":"2026-08-26T17:59:20+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":45,"complexity":15,"support_request":null,"confidence":75,"impact":50,"quick_win":42.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":41175,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2788","title":"uv plugin fails on core26: dispatch script uses system Python instead of venv","author":"zyga","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/2788","summary":"uv plugin fails on core26: craft-parts removes python symlinks from venv/bin/, dispatch script falls back to system Python without venv packages. Triaged and moved to Charmcraft by maintainer.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has been triaged (labeled Status: Triaged, Type: Bug) and a maintainer (@lengau) responded on 2026-07-15, explicitly moving it to Charmcraft directly. The bug is valid with clear reproduction steps and root cause analysis showing craft-parts removes python symlinks from venv/bin/ on core26, causing the dispatch script to fall back to system Python without venv packages.","scores":{"impact":55,"quick_win":24.75,"staleness":45,"complexity":55,"confidence":75,"support_request":15},"age_days":60,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Bug"],"created_at":"2026-07-15T09:05:16+00:00","updated_at":"2026-07-15T16:26:12+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":45,"complexity":55,"support_request":15,"confidence":75,"impact":55,"quick_win":24.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":22062,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1023","title":"`subprocess.run` emitting wrapper","author":"mattculler","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/1023","summary":"Feature request for a general subprocess wrapper that logs the command and prefixes output lines with ':: ', consolidating craft-parts' process_run; unlabelled, a contributor asked for implementation guidance 42 days ago with no maintainer response.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no assignee, and no maintainer response; a contributor (karkra911) asked 42 days ago for the preferred implementation location and existing code to reuse and is still waiting. The referenced process_run in os_utils.py and the separate process.run utility both still exist, so the request is valid but needs a maintainer to scope placement and priority before work can start.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":13.75,"staleness":45,"complexity":45,"confidence":75,"support_request":10},"age_days":568,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-02-21T20:23:06+00:00","updated_at":"2026-07-20T14:57:46+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":45,"complexity":45,"support_request":10,"confidence":75,"impact":25,"quick_win":13.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":1466,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2680","title":"`name` field missing from packed charm's `metadata.yaml` when defined in `charmcraft.yaml` alongside a separate `metadata.yaml`","author":"javierdelapuente","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/2680","summary":"Charmcraft 4.0.1 packs a metadata.yaml without the `name` field when `name` is defined in charmcraft.yaml and a separate metadata.yaml (lacking `name`) exists, making the charm undeployable in Juju. Confirmed by a second user; no maintainer response yet.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"No labels, no assignee, and no maintainer response — only a second user (@gfouillet) confirming the bug on 2026-05-05. The code path is visible: preprocess.add_metadata only migrates fields in METADATA_YAML_MIGRATE_FIELDS from metadata.yaml into charmcraft.yaml, and PackageService._write_file_or_object copies the source metadata.yaml verbatim when it exists, so a `name` defined only in charmcraft.yaml is never written into the packed metadata.yaml. This is a real, reproducible, app-breaking bug (Juju rejects the charm) affecting any project using the legacy split-file layout, so it needs triage and a fix rather than closure.","scores":{"impact":80,"quick_win":36.0,"staleness":45,"complexity":55,"confidence":75,"support_request":5},"age_days":135,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-04-30T21:16:00+00:00","updated_at":"2026-05-21T07:47:30+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":45,"complexity":55,"support_request":5,"confidence":75,"impact":80,"quick_win":36.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":1610,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2528","title":"docs: Status of `parts` field in `charmcraft.yaml` is misleading","author":"wctaylor","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/2528","summary":"charmcraft.yaml reference docs label the `parts` field as 'Recommended', but it is actually required for newer bases (PlatformCharm model enforces min_length=1). Triaged by maintainers; fix deferred to a comprehensive charmcraft.yaml reference review before Kitbash lands. Doc still says 'Recommended' in current main.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainers actively triaged this (labels 'Status: Triaged' + 'Type: Documentation') and explicitly committed to addressing it: jahn-junior said it 'will be addressed in our comprehensive review of the charmcraft.yaml reference before introducing Kitbash', and an internal ticket CHARMCRAFT-683 was created. Code confirms the doc is wrong — PlatformCharm.parts has min_length=1 while legacy CharmProject.parts has a default — so the issue remains valid and unresolved; docs/reference/files/charmcraft-yaml-file.rst still reads '**Status:** Recommended.' for `parts`.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":30.0,"staleness":45,"complexity":25,"confidence":85,"support_request":5},"age_days":274,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Documentation"],"created_at":"2025-12-12T14:08:42+00:00","updated_at":"2026-02-04T22:29:28+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":45,"complexity":25,"support_request":5,"confidence":85,"impact":40,"quick_win":30.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":5977,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"5933","title":"snapcraft fails with cmake not finding libpugixml.a","author":"luspi","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/5933","summary":"Building a core24 snap with the kde-neon-6 extension fails because CMake's pugixml::static imported target points to /snap/kde-qt6-core24-sdk/.../libpugixml.a, which is absent from the SDK snap while the .a exists in the build environment's /usr/lib. Untriaged, no labels, no comments.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"No labels, no maintainer comments, and no assignee, so this has not been assessed. It is a plausible real bug: the kde-neon-6 extension prepends /snap/kde-qt6-core24-sdk/current/usr to CMAKE_PREFIX_PATH (snapcraft/extensions/kde_neon_6.py), so find_package(pugixml) resolves the SDK snap's pugixml-config.cmake whose imported target references a static lib the SDK snap does not ship, even though libpugixml-dev is installed in the build environment. Related prior work e2daf4cbe (#5585) adjusted this same CMAKE_PREFIX_PATH ordering, but no fix for missing .a files in the SDK snap is evident.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":22.5,"staleness":45,"complexity":55,"confidence":60,"support_request":25},"age_days":266,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-12-21T04:58:51+00:00","updated_at":"2025-12-21T04:58:51+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":45,"complexity":55,"support_request":25,"confidence":60,"impact":50,"quick_win":22.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":22657,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"427","title":"Using `source-subdir` results in `No such file or directory` ","author":"sed-i","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/427","summary":"source-subdir not respected in override-build commands; behavior now documented as intended in #1374, attempted fix #442 was reverted; user must cd into subdir manually in override-build","suggested_action":"close_not_a_bug","suggested_action_reason":"The docs (added in #1374) now explicitly state that override-build commands 'don't respect the source-subdir value and are executed on the source's root directory.' The attempted code fix (#442) was reverted, confirming this is by design. The user's workaround of cd-ing into the subdir is the correct approach.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":20.0,"staleness":45,"complexity":20,"confidence":85,"support_request":75},"age_days":1234,"labels":[],"created_at":"2023-04-28T08:23:09+00:00","updated_at":"2026-08-30T21:55:55+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":45,"complexity":20,"support_request":75,"confidence":85,"impact":25,"quick_win":20.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":22606,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"496","title":"part `build-snaps` channel change doesn't work without a `clean`","author":"jugmac00","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/496","summary":"Changing the build-snaps channel in charmcraft.yaml is ignored on subsequent charmcraft pack runs unless a clean is performed first. Triaged as a craft-parts bug (snap not refreshed when channel changes); transferred to craft-parts with a related charmcraft hotfix bug.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer @lengau confirmed this is a real bug in craft-parts and transferred it there, and a Jira ticket (CRAFT-5269) was created 47 days ago, so it is triaged and actively tracked. The root cause is visible in craft_parts/packages/snaps.py install_snaps(), which only calls snap_pkg.install() when the snap is not installed and never refreshes an already-installed snap to a new channel — matching the 'do not refresh already installed snaps' behavior from commit 4c8c41cc. It should stay open until the channel-change refresh logic is implemented.","scores":{"impact":55,"quick_win":24.75,"staleness":45,"complexity":55,"confidence":70,"support_request":5},"age_days":1180,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Bug"],"created_at":"2023-06-21T07:31:47+00:00","updated_at":"2026-07-15T17:51:04+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":45,"complexity":55,"support_request":5,"confidence":70,"impact":55,"quick_win":24.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":44904,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"1348","title":"chore: Update gunicorn v2 extensions to use the /app root directory","author":"javierdelapuente","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/pull/1348","summary":"Updates Flask and Django v2 extensions to use /app as application root, aligning with paas-charm v2. Pending review with 0 reviewers; CI has failing build and snap-build checks.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"The PR has been inactive for 16 days with 0 reviewers assigned and failing CI checks (build, snap-build). The contributor requested a review from @alithethird but received no response. The changes are legitimate (aligning extensions with paas-charm v2) and CI failures may be environmental rather than code issues, so maintainer review is needed to assess and proceed.","scores":{"impact":55,"quick_win":35.75,"staleness":45,"complexity":35,"confidence":70},"age_days":17,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-08-26T11:40:50+00:00","updated_at":"2026-09-11T11:48:05+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":45,"complexity":35,"support_request":null,"confidence":70,"impact":55,"quick_win":35.75,"has_related_links":false},{"id":13665,"project_name":"craft-cli","source":"github","external_id":"75","title":"Linefeeds are wrong when output is redirected to file","author":"cmatsuoka","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-cli/issues/75","summary":"Redirecting craft-cli output to a file produces mangled linefeeds (stray CRs and padding) instead of clean LF-terminated lines. No labels, no comments, no maintainer response; last activity 47 days ago. The captured-output path in printer.py exists but the reported mangling is not confirmed fixed.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no comments, and no maintainer acknowledgement, so it has not been triaged. The captured-output path (_write_line_captured, _write_bar_captured) exists in printer.py and PR #98 added 'full support for captured output', but there is no evidence the specific CR/padding mangling reported here was addressed, so it cannot be closed as fixed. A maintainer needs to confirm whether the current captured-output path still emits stray CRs and padding when redirected to a file.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":24.0,"staleness":45,"complexity":40,"confidence":55,"support_request":5},"age_days":1619,"labels":[],"created_at":"2022-04-08T00:41:03+00:00","updated_at":"2026-07-15T17:59:45+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":45,"complexity":40,"support_request":5,"confidence":55,"impact":40,"quick_win":24.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":5716,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"6209","title":"docs: update base in rust tutorial","author":"SkippyoftheWired","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/pull/6209","summary":"Docs-only change updating the Rust tutorial example recipe base from core18 to core24, then to core26 in a follow-up commit. Approved by one reviewer but has 5 unresolved review comments; author pushed a new commit awaiting re-review.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"The PR is approved by one reviewer but carries 5 unresolved review comments, and the author's last comment (2026-05-08) states 'I pushed a new commit with the update to 26.' The target file docs/how-to/code/integrations/example-rust-recipe.yaml still shows base: core18 in the repo, confirming the change is unmerged. A maintainer needs to re-review the new core26 commit and resolve the open comments before it can land.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":13.5,"staleness":45,"complexity":10,"confidence":78},"age_days":142,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-04-23T23:43:32+00:00","updated_at":"2026-05-14T08:07:54+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":45,"complexity":10,"support_request":null,"confidence":78,"impact":15,"quick_win":13.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":22070,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1015","title":"rust plugin does not cross-compile","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/1015","summary":"Rust plugin builds for host arch instead of target arch when cross-compiling. Triaged by maintainer with a fix plan (map arch to rust triple, rustup target add, set CARGO_BUILD_TARGET); a working PR branch was shared Aug 2025, but no fix has landed in craft-parts yet.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is labelled Status: Triaged and the maintainer (lengau) actively worked it: on 2025-02-13 they outlined the fix (map target arch to rust triple, run `rustup target add`, set `CARGO_BUILD_TARGET`/`--target`), noted remaining linking issues, and on 2025-08-15 pointed to a working PR branch (lengau/uv-snap#9). The current rust_plugin.py still has no CARGO_BUILD_TARGET or target-triple handling, so the bug is unfixed and the issue remains actionable.","scores":{"impact":65,"quick_win":26.0,"staleness":45,"complexity":60,"confidence":70,"support_request":5},"age_days":579,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Bug"],"created_at":"2025-02-10T20:25:07+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T16:33:56+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":45,"complexity":60,"support_request":5,"confidence":70,"impact":65,"quick_win":26.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":1700,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2437","title":"Charm with name beginning `test` fails unit tests","author":"dwilding","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/2437","summary":"Charm names starting with 'test' cause pytest to misidentify the generated charm class (e.g. TestApplicationCharm) as a test class, failing unit tests. Maintainers discussed on 2025-11-05 and prefer rejecting such names at init time. No fix implemented yet; no labels or assignee.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainers @james-garner-canonical and @benhoyt actively discussed the issue on 2025-11-05, with @benhoyt stating 'We (Charm Tech) would be keen on KISS: Have Charmcraft reject charm names that begin with test.' The bug is confirmed reproducible, the fix direction is agreed upon, but no code change has landed (no `__test__` or name-rejection logic found in init.py). The issue remains valid and actionable.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":22.5,"staleness":45,"complexity":25,"confidence":72,"support_request":5},"age_days":368,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-09-10T03:01:48+00:00","updated_at":"2025-11-05T08:23:57+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":45,"complexity":25,"support_request":5,"confidence":72,"impact":30,"quick_win":22.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":41574,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"2161192","title":"python plugin not working  at all with snapcraft 9+","author":"~t-a-k","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2161192","summary":"Python plugin broken on core26/snapcraft 9+ — modules not loading, requires python3-venv instead of python3. No maintainer response after 49 days.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is a valid bug report with specific details and a workaround, but has received no maintainer response or labels after 49 days. The reporter clearly describes two problems: python3-venv stage package requirement and modules not loading. This needs maintainer assessment to determine if it's a known issue, if it's been fixed, or if it requires investigation.","scores":{"impact":65,"quick_win":42.25,"staleness":45,"complexity":35,"confidence":75,"support_request":15},"age_days":56,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-07-18T12:43:24.188709+00:00","updated_at":"2026-07-18T12:43:24.188709+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":45,"complexity":35,"support_request":15,"confidence":75,"impact":65,"quick_win":42.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":41366,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"2161030","title":"linter with gpu-extension not relevant","author":"~t-a-k","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2161030","summary":"Library linter reports false positives for dependencies provided via gpu-extension mesa slot; untriaged, no maintainer response","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no maintainer comments, and no assignee after 50 days. It reports a legitimate bug where the library linter produces false positives for dependencies (e.g. libX11, libxml2) that are provided through the gpu-extension's mesa slot. A maintainer needs to triage and confirm whether this is a known limitation or a fixable bug.","scores":{"impact":60,"quick_win":27.0,"staleness":45,"complexity":55,"confidence":50,"support_request":15},"age_days":58,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-07-16T22:48:02.250651+00:00","updated_at":"2026-07-16T22:53:41.453507+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":45,"complexity":55,"support_request":15,"confidence":50,"impact":60,"quick_win":27.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":4549,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"1126","title":"remote-build fails with build-base devel","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/1126","summary":"rockcraft remote-build fails with 'Build request failed' when using build-base: devel; maintainer suspects craft-application/Launchpad remote-build path, not Rockcraft logic.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"A maintainer (gcomneno) triaged the issue on 2026-03-31, confirming the failure occurs in craft_application.services.remotebuild during build creation and suggesting upstream triage in craft-application or a linked upstream issue. The issue is acknowledged and scoped but not yet resolved, so it should remain open pending upstream action.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":16.0,"staleness":45,"complexity":60,"confidence":65,"support_request":10},"age_days":190,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-03-06T23:02:06+00:00","updated_at":"2026-03-31T14:31:30+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":45,"complexity":60,"support_request":10,"confidence":65,"impact":40,"quick_win":16.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":7504,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"4373","title":"library linter fails on foreign archs and can't be disabled for core20","author":"alexclewontin","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/4373","summary":"Snapcraft's library linter fails on foreign-arch ELF files (cross-compile) and cannot be disabled on core20, causing build failures and multi-GB core dumps. Triaged with a maintainer note to check ELF target arch; no fix landed yet.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is labelled Status: Triaged and Type: Bug, and a maintainer (mr-cal, 2025-02-20) explicitly scoped the fix: 'update the library linter to check the target arch of elf files along the lines of readelf -h <bin> | grep Machine'. An internal Jira ticket (CRAFT-4190) was created, and no commit in the linters path has implemented this arch check yet, so the issue remains valid and open.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":22.5,"staleness":45,"complexity":55,"confidence":70,"support_request":5},"age_days":1087,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Bug"],"created_at":"2023-09-21T15:32:27+00:00","updated_at":"2025-04-24T15:44:55+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":45,"complexity":55,"support_request":5,"confidence":70,"impact":50,"quick_win":22.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":39839,"project_name":"craft-providers","source":"github","external_id":"857","title":"ci: add weekly lxd tests","author":"lengau","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-providers/pull/857","summary":"Adds weekly LXD integration tests across Ubuntu/LXD/Python version matrices. Approved by 2 reviewers, CI passing, 0 unresolved comments.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"PR has 2 approvals, 0 unresolved review comments, and CI is passing. Despite being 273 days old, recent activity (3 days ago) discusses test failures as network issues unrelated to the PR itself. Ready for maintainer merge.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":21.25,"staleness":45,"complexity":15,"confidence":80},"age_days":281,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-12-05T19:49:43+00:00","updated_at":"2026-09-01T13:37:43+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":45,"complexity":15,"support_request":null,"confidence":80,"impact":25,"quick_win":21.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":3254,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"872","title":"charm artifacts from reactive plugin are missing valuable build metadata","author":"addyess","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/872","summary":"Reactive charms built via charmcraft's reactive plugin lack the .build.manifest file that charm-tools generates, and manifest.yaml omits charm-tools version. Triaged (Status: Triaged, Type: Bug); internal ticket CHARMCRAFT-654 created 2025-09-17; no code change yet.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is labelled Status: Triaged and Type: Bug, and a Jira ticket (CHARMCRAFT-654) was created on 2025-09-17, showing active internal tracking. The reactive plugin still invokes `charm build` via subprocess (charmcraft/parts/plugins/_reactive.py) and the Manifest model (charmcraft/models/manifest.py) has no charm-tools version field, so neither part of the request is implemented. It is a real bug/feature gap, not a support question, and should remain open.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":24.0,"staleness":45,"complexity":40,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":1453,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Bug"],"created_at":"2022-09-20T19:39:33+00:00","updated_at":"2025-12-03T18:34:14+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":45,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":40,"quick_win":24.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":4479,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"1196","title":"fix(pebble): avoid pydantic warning for exec checks","author":"gcomneno","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/pull/1196","summary":"Fixes PydanticSerializationUnexpectedValue warning when marshalling projects with exec checks by handling already-validated models in the check discriminator; adds unit test. Closes #1154. Rebased on main, author active; awaiting review, minor CI failures.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"The PR is small (+45/-4, 2 files) and still relevant: issue #1154 remains open and rockcraft/pebble.py on main still has the unpatched _get_check_tag discriminator. The author actively maintained it (rebased onto upstream/main, merged @lczyk's patch, reran focused tests with 80 passed), but it has 0 reviewers and pending review status, with only minor CI failures (source-spread-tests, OSV-scanner, lint/files).","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":28.0,"staleness":45,"complexity":20,"confidence":82},"age_days":143,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-04-23T02:00:16+00:00","updated_at":"2026-07-01T14:05:52+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":45,"complexity":20,"support_request":null,"confidence":82,"impact":35,"quick_win":28.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":4644,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"1031","title":"Support uv plugin in fastapi extension","author":"jneo8","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/1031","summary":"Feature request to integrate the uv plugin with the fastapi-framework extension, which currently requires requirements.txt. Maintainer confirmed the change is planned for 26.04; reporter has a workaround and offered to test.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer @javierdelapuente explicitly acknowledged this is 'a change we have in mind to add in 26.04' and offered office hours/Matrix to discuss, so it is triaged and valid. The reporter confirmed a workaround (generating requirements.txt before rockcraft pack) and offered to test on release, so there is no need to close. It should stay open pending the planned 26.04 implementation.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"staleness":45,"complexity":40,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":297,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-11-20T08:22:26+00:00","updated_at":"2025-12-03T08:37:50+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":45,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":41033,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2785","title":"test(spread): fix different-dir task assertions","author":"lengau","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/pull/2785","summary":"Fixes spread test assertions for different-dir tasks to match --project-dir artifact output locations. Small change (+6/-5, 2 files), CI passing, authored by maintainer, no review activity.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"This is a small, focused test fix (+6/-5 lines) authored by a maintainer with all CI checks passing. The PR updates spread test assertions to match current runtime behavior for --project-dir artifact placement. It has received no review comments in 53 days and needs maintainer review to proceed.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":12.75,"staleness":45,"complexity":15,"confidence":70},"age_days":60,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-07-14T16:46:23+00:00","updated_at":"2026-07-14T20:02:58+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":45,"complexity":15,"support_request":null,"confidence":70,"impact":15,"quick_win":12.75,"has_related_links":false},{"id":2061,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2068","title":"Advanced grammar doesn't work with multi-platform (ST124) charms","author":"carlcsaposs-canonical","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/2068","summary":"Charmcraft advanced grammar does not support platform-specific build-packages/build-snaps for multi-platform (ST124) charms; maintainer confirmed it is not implemented yet, with no ETA. Issue is acknowledged but unresolved.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"A maintainer (mr-cal) explicitly acknowledged the issue on 2025-01-08, stating it is expected behavior because charmcraft does not officially support advanced grammar and craft-grammar does not support using the platform in grammar statements, with tasks outlined but no ETA. This is a known, triaged feature gap rather than a stale or invalid report, so it should remain open pending implementation.","scores":{"impact":55,"quick_win":16.5,"staleness":45,"complexity":70,"confidence":80,"support_request":15},"age_days":612,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-01-08T11:57:44+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:18:01+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":45,"complexity":70,"support_request":15,"confidence":80,"impact":55,"quick_win":16.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":6782,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"5097","title":"[doc] Clarify the difference between `-v` and `--verbosity` in help messages","author":"sed-i","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/5097","summary":"Clarify the confusing overlap between -v/--verbose and --verbosity in snapcraft help messages. Triaged as an enhancement; maintainer acknowledged it's valid but the help text is driven internally by Canonical and not ready for external contribution. An upstream craft-cli PR (#424) was submitted.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer mr-cal explicitly stated on 2026-03-16: 'I'm leaving this issue open to acknowledge that it could be improved, but this isn't ready for a contribution.' The issue is triaged (Status: Triaged, Type: Enhancement), the underlying help text in craft-cli/dispatcher.py is still unchanged, and an upstream fix (craft-cli#424) exists. It remains a valid, acknowledged enhancement.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":16.25,"staleness":45,"complexity":35,"confidence":80,"support_request":10},"age_days":705,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2024-10-07T12:30:25+00:00","updated_at":"2026-05-19T12:27:19+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":45,"complexity":35,"support_request":10,"confidence":80,"impact":25,"quick_win":16.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":4155,"project_name":"imagecraft","source":"github","external_id":"312","title":"Support adding or removing PPAs to the image","author":"dilyn-corner","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/imagecraft/issues/312","summary":"Feature request to natively add/remove PPAs and archives in the image's apt sources. Triaged as an enhancement; a how-to (PR #355) was merged as the first step documenting a dump-plugin workaround, but removing the default PPA and build-vs-final repo distinction remain unimplemented. Reporter says need is less pressing.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Triaged enhancement with active maintainer discussion; @steinbro (2026-05-26) scoped a first step (how-to) which was merged as PR #355, but the core feature (removing the default PPA, build-only vs final-environment repos, possible new plugin) is still pending. The reporter explicitly said 'take your time in implementing,' so it should stay open as a valid, acknowledged enhancement rather than be closed.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":45,"complexity":60,"confidence":75,"support_request":10},"age_days":169,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2026-03-27T21:57:45+00:00","updated_at":"2026-05-26T15:36:23+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":45,"complexity":60,"support_request":10,"confidence":75,"impact":45,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":21536,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1553","title":"fix(deb): avoid re-downloading cached stage-packages","author":"gcomneno","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/pull/1553","summary":"Patches apt-cache to treat cached .debs matching expected metadata as cache hits, avoiding repeated stage-packages re-downloads (workaround for python-apt _file_is_same bug). Awaiting review; CI mostly green with a few unrelated failures.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"Issue #1495 is still open and the maintainer confirmed the analysis, explicitly naming this PR (#1553) as the pending local mitigation, and I verified the fix is not yet in craft_parts/packages/apt_cache.py (fetch_archives still calls fetch_binary with no _file_is_same patch). Last author activity was 88 days ago (rebase + lint fix), so it is within the 3-month window and not irrelevant, but it has 0 reviewers and a few failing CI jobs (OSV-scanner, lint/files, test-requires-root fast, java s390x) that a maintainer should triage.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":22.5,"staleness":45,"complexity":50,"confidence":80},"age_days":144,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-04-21T15:28:04+00:00","updated_at":"2026-06-04T18:19:41+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":45,"complexity":50,"support_request":null,"confidence":80,"impact":45,"quick_win":22.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":6553,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"5326","title":"Setting the icon key leads to all icons replaced in the .desktop file","author":"ilya-fedin","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/5326","summary":"Snapcraft replaces every Icon= entry in a .desktop file (including Desktop Action icons) with the snap icon when a top-level icon key is set, breaking themed/action icons. Triaged as an enhancement; reporter noted in July 2025 it regressed further, now replacing icons even without an icon key.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is labelled Status: Triaged and Type: Enhancement, and a maintainer (mr-cal) acknowledged it on 2025-03-19, proposing an app-attributes opt-in/opt-out mechanism and linking a minimal reproducer. The reporter then reported a further regression on 2025-07-29 (icons replaced even without an icon key) and a sharpness regression on 2025-08-07, so it is still actively relevant and unresolved. Recent commits (e.g. #6385 'mediate desktop, icon, and manifest files') show ongoing work in this area but no fix for the all-icons-replaced behavior.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":22.5,"staleness":45,"complexity":55,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":550,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2025-03-12T05:40:48+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-07T20:52:42+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":45,"complexity":55,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":50,"quick_win":22.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":6444,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"5435","title":"remote build: deprecate `--build-for`","author":"mr-cal","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/5435","summary":"Deprecate --build-for in snapcraft remote-build to align with Craft Application and other craft tools. Triaged by maintainer who confirmed it can ship in a minor release, but blocked by Launchpad's new build farm migration for --platform support. Code confirms --build-for is still active without deprecation warning.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is labeled 'Status: Triaged' and maintainer mr-cal commented 215 days ago confirming it can be done in a minor release without waiting for Snapcraft 9. Code inspection of snapcraft/commands/remote.py confirms --build-for is still defined in _fill_parser with no deprecation warning or help-text hiding, so the work remains outstanding. The issue is blocked by an external Launchpad migration, which justifies keeping it open rather than closing.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":22.75,"staleness":45,"complexity":35,"confidence":80,"support_request":5},"age_days":506,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2025-04-24T19:17:47+00:00","updated_at":"2026-01-28T18:34:00+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":45,"complexity":35,"support_request":5,"confidence":80,"impact":35,"quick_win":22.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":39610,"project_name":"imagecraft","source":"github","external_id":"361","title":"[DISCUSS] Auto-generated base files?","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/imagecraft/issues/361","summary":"Discussion about auto-generating default base files like /etc/hosts in images, with a suggestion to use templates. No labels, maintainer-initiated, stalled after one comment.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is a feature discussion initiated by maintainer lengau but lacks any labels or clear prioritization. It has been inactive for 66 days after one comment from @steinbro suggesting a templating approach. Without labels or maintainer categorization, it needs triage to determine whether this is a valid feature request, a design discussion to continue, or something to defer.","scores":{"impact":55,"quick_win":24.75,"staleness":45,"complexity":55,"confidence":75,"support_request":15},"age_days":80,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-06-24T15:14:22+00:00","updated_at":"2026-06-30T19:33:55+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":45,"complexity":55,"support_request":15,"confidence":75,"impact":55,"quick_win":24.75,"has_related_links":false},{"id":6296,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"5583","title":"expand-extensions fails to process advanced grammar in parts/part/prime","author":"tsteven4","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/5583","summary":"expand-extensions crashes with AttributeError when a part's prime keyword uses advanced grammar (on amd64). Grammar is only processed for a fixed key list, not prime. Triaged, minimal reproducer provided, internal ticket SNAPCRAFT-1184 opened.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"A maintainer (mr-cal) triaged this, confirmed it as a real bug, and provided a minimal reproducer; an internal Jira ticket (SNAPCRAFT-1184) was created. The root cause is visible in code: snapcraft/parts/grammar.py only processes a fixed _KEYS list (source, build-environment, build-packages, stage-packages, build-snaps, stage-snaps) and omits prime/stage, so the grammar dict reaches craft_parts validation unprocessed. It is a valid, scoped bug that should remain open until fixed.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"staleness":45,"complexity":40,"confidence":70,"support_request":5},"age_days":444,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Bug"],"created_at":"2025-06-26T00:18:15+00:00","updated_at":"2025-07-21T13:36:08+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":45,"complexity":40,"support_request":5,"confidence":70,"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":21596,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1493","title":"go plugin: Add flag to run tests during build phase","author":"steinbro","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/1493","summary":"Feature request to add an enable-checks build attribute to the go plugin so unit tests run during the build phase without an override-build script. Unlabelled, no comments or assignee, inactive ~5.7 months; feature not yet implemented.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is unlabelled with 0 comments and no assignee, showing no maintainer categorization or prioritization. The feature is confirmed unimplemented: go_plugin.py's get_build_commands still ends with 'go install ... ./...' and no 'enable-checks' attribute or commit exists in the repo. It is a well-scoped feature request that simply needs triage.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":21.0,"staleness":45,"complexity":30,"confidence":80,"support_request":10},"age_days":185,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-03-12T00:14:37+00:00","updated_at":"2026-03-12T00:15:22+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":45,"complexity":30,"support_request":10,"confidence":80,"impact":30,"quick_win":21.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":5688,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"6238","title":"Update gpu extension spread test","author":"mr-cal","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/6238","summary":"Task to remove the mesa-2604 --edge install workaround from the GPU extension spread test once the mesa-2604 snap reaches stable. The workaround is still present in the code, so the task remains valid and pending.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The author is a maintainer (mr-cal) who self-filed this as a scoped follow-up task, and the workaround it targets is still present in tests/spread/extensions/gpu/task.yaml ('snap install mesa-2604 --edge' with the comment referencing #6238), so it is not outdated. It is blocked on an external dependency (mesa-2604 stable release) rather than being stale or unactionable, so it should stay open until that lands.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":13.5,"staleness":45,"complexity":10,"confidence":80,"support_request":0},"age_days":130,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-05-05T11:27:02+00:00","updated_at":"2026-05-05T11:31:11+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":45,"complexity":10,"support_request":0,"confidence":80,"impact":15,"quick_win":13.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":21594,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1495","title":"Bug: stage-packages re-downloaded on every run due to python-apt _file_is_same() bug","author":"EddyPronk","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/1495","summary":"stage-packages .debs are re-downloaded on every run because python-apt's _file_is_same() compares hash lists order-sensitively. Maintainer confirmed the analysis; draft PR #1553 with a local craft-parts mitigation is pending, and the bug is still unfixed in the code.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The maintainer explicitly triaged this ('the report seems solid') and opened draft PR #1553 scoped to the fetch_binary/apt-cache path, so it is acknowledged and in progress. I verified the bug is still live: apt_cache.py still calls package.candidate.fetch_binary() with no _file_is_same workaround, and no commit referencing #1553 or #1485 has landed. Last activity was ~4 months ago, so it is moderately stale but not stale enough to close.","scores":{"impact":55,"quick_win":30.25,"staleness":45,"complexity":45,"confidence":85,"support_request":5},"age_days":184,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-03-13T09:57:14+00:00","updated_at":"2026-04-21T15:29:04+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":45,"complexity":45,"support_request":5,"confidence":85,"impact":55,"quick_win":30.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":5162,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"513","title":"Missing craft-parts plugins in reference","author":"alnvdl-work","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/513","summary":"Docs request to clarify that rockcraft's plugin reference covers craft-parts (upstream) plugins, not snapcraft-specific ones. Maintainer confirmed the plugin reference already reuses craft-parts rst files and the remaining work is upstream plugin docs in craft-parts.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer @lengau triaged and acknowledged the issue, clarifying the plugins are upstream craft-parts ones and that @tigarmo is working on it with the bulk of the work being upstream plugin documentation (referencing craft-parts#694). The plugin reference already includes craft-parts rst files, but the issue remains open pending the upstream doc work, so it should stay open.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":24.0,"staleness":45,"complexity":20,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":908,"labels":["Type: Documentation"],"created_at":"2024-03-18T18:53:20+00:00","updated_at":"2025-12-11T14:55:28+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":45,"complexity":20,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":30,"quick_win":24.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":40646,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"1291","title":"Execute parts as `run_user`","author":"sed-i","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/1291","summary":"Feature request to execute parts as run_user to avoid manual chmod/chown steps. Open for contribution, awaiting maintainer triage.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"This is a valid feature request to execute parts as run_user, but no maintainer has responded yet. A contributor (@OchukoWH) expressed interest in working on it 46 days ago, but the issue lacks labels, assignee, or maintainer acknowledgment. Triage is needed to determine if this feature aligns with the project roadmap and to provide implementation guidance.","scores":{"impact":70,"quick_win":28.0,"staleness":45,"complexity":60,"confidence":70,"support_request":20},"age_days":66,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-07-09T07:21:28+00:00","updated_at":"2026-07-21T14:49:54+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":45,"complexity":60,"support_request":20,"confidence":70,"impact":70,"quick_win":28.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":4214,"project_name":"imagecraft","source":"github","external_id":"253","title":"Support the LXD provider","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/imagecraft/issues/253","summary":"Feature request to add LXD provider support to Imagecraft. Triaged and actively discussed by maintainers with a current plan to use an LXD VM provider. Blocked by external LXD dependency (canonical/lxd#16070) and container block device limitations.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Issue is triaged (labeled 'Status: Triaged') with active maintainer discussion over the last 3 months. steinbro (2026-05-20) states 'The current plan is to add an LXD VM provider' and mwhudson (2026-05-24) references PR #348 with ideas for unprivileged container support. The issue is blocked by external dependency canonical/lxd#16070 but has a clear path forward, so it should remain open.","scores":{"impact":65,"quick_win":13.0,"staleness":45,"complexity":80,"confidence":85,"support_request":5},"age_days":247,"labels":["Status: Triaged"],"created_at":"2026-01-08T14:37:24+00:00","updated_at":"2026-05-24T21:32:13+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":45,"complexity":80,"support_request":5,"confidence":85,"impact":65,"quick_win":13.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":40647,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"1290","title":"Create dedicated variables for daemon UID, GID","author":"sed-i","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/1290","summary":"Feature request to create CRAFT_NON_ROOT_UID and CRAFT_NON_ROOT_GID environment variables to replace hardcoded 584792 values. Unlabelled, awaiting maintainer triage.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no assignee, and no maintainer response (only a community member comment from @OchukoWH offering to work on it). The hardcoded value 584792 appears 94 times across the codebase, making this a legitimate feature request for better maintainability. However, it requires maintainer assessment to prioritize and scope the work.","scores":{"impact":55,"quick_win":35.75,"staleness":45,"complexity":35,"confidence":75,"support_request":20},"age_days":66,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-07-09T07:18:19+00:00","updated_at":"2026-07-21T14:51:35+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":45,"complexity":35,"support_request":20,"confidence":75,"impact":55,"quick_win":35.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":5325,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"350","title":"Support pinning of snap revisions for build-snaps and stage-snaps","author":"shayancanonical","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/350","summary":"Feature request to allow pinning a specific snap revision in build-snaps/stage-snaps (currently only channels like 8.0/edge are supported). Unimplemented in rockcraft/craft-parts; no maintainer triage, but recent user comments show continued demand.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"No labels, assignee, or maintainer response — only two external user comments (2024-01-24, 2024-07-15) expressing demand. The feature is still unimplemented: craft-parts' SnapPackage only parses name/channel (no revision), and rockcraft's schema documents stage-snaps as plain channel strings. Recent activity (last comment 381 days ago) shows it's not stale, but it needs maintainer assessment.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":22.5,"staleness":45,"complexity":55,"confidence":75,"support_request":10},"age_days":1110,"labels":[],"created_at":"2023-08-29T20:13:45+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:12:56+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":45,"complexity":55,"support_request":10,"confidence":75,"impact":50,"quick_win":22.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":39128,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"2156447","title":"Firefox Snap cannot load PKCS#11 modules (OpenSC / DNIe) due to AppArmor file_mmap denial","author":"~astrojuanlu","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2156447","summary":"Firefox Snap blocked from loading PKCS#11 modules due to AppArmor file_mmap denial; unlabelled, no maintainer response after 83 days","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no maintainer comments, and no assignee after 83 days. It reports an AppArmor denial preventing Firefox snap from loading PKCS#11 modules (opensc-pkcs11.so), which is a legitimate bug if filed against the correct project (firefox-snap or snapd). However, without knowing which project this is filed against and whether it's the right place, triage is needed to determine if it should be reassigned, closed as misfiled, or kept open.","scores":{"impact":65,"quick_win":29.25,"staleness":45,"complexity":55,"confidence":40,"support_request":25},"age_days":93,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-06-11T10:33:21.814259+00:00","updated_at":"2026-06-12T23:30:17.053447+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":45,"complexity":55,"support_request":25,"confidence":40,"impact":65,"quick_win":29.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":39607,"project_name":"imagecraft","source":"github","external_id":"364","title":"\"Always Delete\" files","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/imagecraft/issues/364","summary":"Feature request to add an opt-out post-prime hook that deletes overlay artifacts like /etc/machine-id. Maintainers are discussing implementation details but no labels or assignee yet.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no assignee, and no formal maintainer triage despite two comments discussing implementation concerns (machine-id should be present but empty, warning users when files are deleted). The feature request is valid but needs proper categorization before action.","scores":{"impact":60,"quick_win":27.0,"staleness":45,"complexity":55,"confidence":65,"support_request":10},"age_days":80,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-06-24T15:47:15+00:00","updated_at":"2026-06-30T19:37:10+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":45,"complexity":55,"support_request":10,"confidence":65,"impact":60,"quick_win":27.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":39608,"project_name":"imagecraft","source":"github","external_id":"363","title":"Overlay debconf configuration","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/imagecraft/issues/363","summary":"Feature request to add a debconf configuration plugin for imagecraft, replacing manual override scripts. Untriaged, no maintainer response.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"This is a feature request with no labels, no maintainer response, and no assignee after 72 days. The author provided clear motivation (replacing manual override scripts) and referenced a related debcraft#146 issue about debconf config support. It needs maintainer assessment to determine scope, priority, and whether it belongs in imagecraft or debcraft.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":20.25,"staleness":45,"complexity":55,"confidence":65,"support_request":0},"age_days":80,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-06-24T15:31:32+00:00","updated_at":"2026-06-30T19:22:24+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":45,"complexity":55,"support_request":0,"confidence":65,"impact":45,"quick_win":20.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":5250,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"425","title":"clarify the impact of the global rockcraft.yaml fields in the final ROCK","author":"cjdcordeiro","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/425","summary":"Docs gap: rockcraft.yaml reference does not document that global metadata fields (name, title, summary, description, version, license) implicitly become OCI labels/annotations in the final rock. Open ~3 years; a contributor asked to be assigned on 2026-03-17.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The gap is still real: generate_metadata() in rockcraft/models/project.py (lines 405-443) maps version/title/summary/description/license/base to org.opencontainers.image.* annotations, but the refreshed docs/reference/rockcraft-yaml.rst (kitbash-field directives) contains no mention of this implicit OCI behavior. A contributor (gcomneno) requested assignment on 2026-03-17, so it is not stale and should stay open pending maintainer acknowledgement.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":24.5,"staleness":45,"complexity":30,"confidence":75,"support_request":0},"age_days":1018,"labels":["Type: Documentation"],"created_at":"2023-11-29T16:50:10+00:00","updated_at":"2026-03-17T16:18:40+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":45,"complexity":30,"support_request":0,"confidence":75,"impact":35,"quick_win":24.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":39763,"project_name":"craft-providers","source":"github","external_id":"946","title":"Install snapd from a user-defined channel","author":"mr-cal","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-providers/issues/946","summary":"Enhancement to allow installing snapd from a user-defined channel via CRAFT_SNAPD_CHANNEL env var. Triaged, under maintainer discussion.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is triaged and has active maintainer discussion (mr-cal and lengau commented within the last 135 days about injecting the snapd snap). It's a valid enhancement request with clear implementation steps outlined in the body, not a stale or irrelevant issue.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":45,"complexity":40,"confidence":75,"support_request":10},"age_days":144,"labels":["Type: Enhancement","Status: Triaged"],"created_at":"2026-04-21T21:12:38+00:00","updated_at":"2026-04-22T16:27:52+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":45,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":75,"impact":30,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":41587,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"2161237","title":"Build cannot install already installed build-snap","author":"~t-a-k","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2161237","summary":"Build fails when installing build-snap dependencies that are already present on the system. No maintainer response after 48 days.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no maintainer response, labels, or assignee after 48 days. The traceback points to craft_parts/packages/snaps.py where install_snaps() calls snap_pkg.install() for build-snap dependencies. While the current code shows a check for `if not snap_pkg.installed:` before calling install(), the issue may still be valid due to race conditions or edge cases in the installed check. Needs maintainer triage to confirm if this is still reproducible or has been fixed.","scores":{"impact":60,"quick_win":27.0,"staleness":45,"complexity":55,"confidence":65,"support_request":20},"age_days":55,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-07-19T11:41:16.914270+00:00","updated_at":"2026-07-19T11:42:43.653404+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":45,"complexity":55,"support_request":20,"confidence":65,"impact":60,"quick_win":27.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":43068,"project_name":"craft-archives","source":"github","external_id":"247","title":"CI: docs-lint linkcheck times out reaching manpages.ubuntu.com","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-archives/issues/247","summary":"CI docs-lint linkcheck times out connecting to manpages.ubuntu.com; author suggests excluding the domain or adding retry/backoff. No maintainer response yet.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no maintainer comments, no labels, and no assignee after 24 days. The author (a maintainer) already analyzed it as a transient flaky failure and suggested a fix (exclude manpages.ubuntu.com from linkcheck or add retry/backoff), but no one has acknowledged or acted on it. The current docs/conf.py already has linkcheck_retries=20 and linkcheck_report_timeouts_as_broken=False, but manpages.ubuntu.com is not in linkcheck_ignore, so the suggested fix is straightforward.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":42.5,"staleness":45,"complexity":15,"confidence":65,"support_request":10},"age_days":31,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-08-12T20:50:22+00:00","updated_at":"2026-08-12T20:50:22+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":45,"complexity":15,"support_request":10,"confidence":65,"impact":50,"quick_win":42.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":43287,"project_name":"craft-providers","source":"github","external_id":"998","title":"ci: enable and stabilize multipass tests in QA","author":"lengau","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-providers/pull/998","summary":"Enables and stabilizes multipass integration tests in CI by updating qa.yaml, Makefile, and test assertions. CI passing, 4 unresolved review comments, 0 reviewers assigned.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"The PR has 4 unresolved review comments with 0 reviewers assigned, indicating review is pending but incomplete. CI checks are all passing and the changes come from a maintainer, but the unresolved review comments must be addressed before merge.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":26.25,"staleness":45,"complexity":25,"confidence":65},"age_days":30,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-08-13T18:42:22+00:00","updated_at":"2026-08-29T12:22:16+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":45,"complexity":25,"support_request":null,"confidence":65,"impact":35,"quick_win":26.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":4562,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"1113","title":"oci: set default PATH when missing or empty","author":"gcomneno","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/pull/1113","summary":"Generalizes empty-PATH protection from bare-only to all OCI bases by inspecting final image env via skopeo. Author rebased and re-verified 31 days ago; no maintainer review yet. CI green, 0 reviewers assigned.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"The PR addresses still-open issue #729 and the current code in oci.py:408 still gates on base != 'bare', confirming the change is unmerged and relevant. The author rebased and re-ran tests 31 days ago with 51 passing, but no maintainer has been assigned as reviewer in ~6 months. Needs a maintainer to review the behavioral change (applying to all bases) and the reordering of set_default_path after set_environment in package.py.","scores":{"impact":55,"quick_win":30.25,"staleness":45,"complexity":45,"confidence":72},"age_days":198,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-02-26T11:40:37+00:00","updated_at":"2026-07-31T11:35:25+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":45,"complexity":45,"support_request":null,"confidence":72,"impact":55,"quick_win":30.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":46479,"project_name":"fetch-service","source":"github","external_id":"635","title":"refactor: add make help target and documentation strings","author":"lczyk","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/fetch-service/pull/635","summary":"Adds a self-documenting `make help` target with inline comment extraction and sets it as default. Approved by 2 reviewers, CI passing.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"The PR has received 2 approvals with 0 unresolved comments, and CI checks are passing (except for an unrelated OSV-scanner failure). The change is a minor Makefile polish (+10/-7 lines, 1 file) that adds a self-documenting help target. Ready for maintainer review/merge.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":17.0,"staleness":45,"complexity":15,"confidence":85},"age_days":55,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-07-19T16:03:40+00:00","updated_at":"2026-08-20T19:52:43+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":45,"complexity":15,"support_request":null,"confidence":85,"impact":20,"quick_win":17.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":12729,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"344","title":"remote build: provide a way to set application snap channel","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/issues/344","summary":"Enhancement to add an environment variable or option so remote builds can specify which snap channel (e.g. edge) to use for the application snap in Launchpad build recipes. Triaged by maintainer; not yet implemented.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is labelled Status: Triaged and Type: Enhancement, and the maintainer (lengau) added a concrete implementation note on 2024-05-13 that remote-build tests should run on the edge channel. The recipe model already has auto_build_channels and channels parameters in craft_application/launchpad/models/recipe.py, so the plumbing partially exists but no user-facing env var/option is wired up. Related open issues snapcraft#6384 and charmcraft#1706 confirm this is still an active, unimplemented need across the craft ecosystem.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"staleness":45,"complexity":40,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":852,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2024-05-13T15:08:48+00:00","updated_at":"2026-01-28T18:33:35+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":45,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":15602,"project_name":"snapcraft-rocks","source":"github","external_id":"108","title":"chore(deps): update docker/login-action action to v3.7.0 (core24-8)","author":"renovate","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft-rocks/pull/108","summary":"Renovate bot PR bumping docker/login-action from v3.5.0 to v3.7.0 on the core24-8 branch. 1-line change, 0 comments, no maintainer review. CI: CLA+lint pass, self-hosted build-rock (arm64/amd64) still pending.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"This is a routine Renovate dependency bump (1-line change) with no maintainer interaction and no comments, but it is not irrelevant: the target branch core24-8 still carries the docker/login-action reference the PR updates, and sibling PRs #106/#107 for the same v3.7.0 bump on core22-7/core22-8 remain open, indicating the update is still wanted across branches. CI is not failing (only self-hosted build-rock jobs are pending), and there is no maintainer request for changes left unaddressed, so there is no basis to close it as stale or not-mergeable. It simply awaits manual merge since automerge is disabled.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":14.25,"staleness":45,"complexity":5,"confidence":60},"age_days":348,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-09-29T15:36:25+00:00","updated_at":"2026-07-24T21:11:48+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":45,"complexity":5,"support_request":null,"confidence":60,"impact":15,"quick_win":14.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":6624,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"5255","title":"With the advanced grammar, only the last `- to` clause is respected","author":"simondeziel","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/5255","summary":"Advanced grammar bug: when a list has multiple `- to <arch>` clauses plus `else`, only the last `to` clause is respected, so e.g. armhf still pulls packages meant for other arches. Triaged, tracked upstream at craft-grammar#89, and added to a snapcraft pulse (June 2025) pending scoping; no fix yet.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainers have triaged this (Status: Triaged, Type: Bug labels), filed the upstream bug at canonical/craft-grammar#89, and in June 2025 sergiusens asked to get it fixed next pulse and mr-cal confirmed it was added to the pulse pending scoping. The upstream craft-grammar#89 is still open and the current craft-grammar code still processes `to` clauses one at a time with no fix commit found, so the issue remains valid and actively tracked.","scores":{"impact":65,"quick_win":29.25,"staleness":45,"complexity":55,"confidence":80,"support_request":5},"age_days":578,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Bug"],"created_at":"2025-02-11T21:48:31+00:00","updated_at":"2025-06-12T12:58:53+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":45,"complexity":55,"support_request":5,"confidence":80,"impact":65,"quick_win":29.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":12230,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"844","title":"Projects with no parts are always repacked","author":"jonathan-conder","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/issues/844","summary":"Bug: with always_repack=False, projects with no parts always repack because prime_state_timestamp is None. Triaged (Status: Triaged, Type: Bug), internal ticket CRAFT-4693 created. Current code (commit dc14f0e1, PR #1164 'fix: don't package projects with no parts') now skips packing entirely for no-parts projects, so the unnecessary repack no longer occurs.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is triaged (Status: Triaged, Type: Bug) and a maintainer acknowledged it ('another weird repacking edge case') with an internal ticket CRAFT-4693. The current code at HEAD (commit dc14f0e1, PR #1164 'fix: don't package projects with no parts') now early-returns in _run_pack when there are no parts, emitting 'No packages created' instead of repacking — which resolves the core complaint, though the reporter expected 'Already packed'. Keeping open pending confirmation that #1164 is the intended resolution and the issue is closed accordingly.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":24.0,"staleness":45,"complexity":40,"confidence":70,"support_request":5},"age_days":403,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Bug"],"created_at":"2025-08-06T00:59:16+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-14T02:31:50+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":45,"complexity":40,"support_request":5,"confidence":70,"impact":40,"quick_win":24.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":5854,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"6066","title":"Filter libraries included in content snaps","author":"mr-cal","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/6066","summary":"Research issue proposing snaps filter out libraries already provided by content snaps (gnome/kde/mesa) to reduce size and avoid runtime conflicts. Triaged, with recent discussion on defaults and implementation approach; no implementation yet.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is explicitly triaged (labels 'Status: Triaged', 'Type: Research') and had substantive community discussion 87 days ago, including aleasto's concrete mesa/libdrm runtime-failure scenario and sergio-costas's remove_common proposal. No implementation exists in the codebase, and chisel (snapcraft 8.14) chisels stage-packages rather than filtering content-snap-duplicated libraries, so the open design questions (syntax, core26 defaults, curated content snap list, extension part vs post-prime step) remain unresolved.","scores":{"impact":60,"quick_win":12.0,"staleness":45,"complexity":80,"confidence":80,"support_request":5},"age_days":199,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Research"],"created_at":"2026-02-25T16:51:19+00:00","updated_at":"2026-06-05T16:36:13+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":45,"complexity":80,"support_request":5,"confidence":80,"impact":60,"quick_win":12.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":43196,"project_name":"imagecraft","source":"github","external_id":"417","title":"refactor: remove the now-unused chroot and loop device helpers","author":"lengau","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/imagecraft/pull/417","summary":"Removes unused chroot handler and loop device helpers after GRUB installation was refactored to work without root privileges. Part 7 of a 7-part stack. No reviewer engagement yet.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"This is Part 7 (final) of a stack refactoring GRUB installation to work without root privileges. The PR removes dead code (chroot.py, loop device helpers) with no reviewer engagement after 23 days. It's a straightforward cleanup PR that should be reviewed and merged to complete the stack.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":35.0,"staleness":45,"complexity":30,"confidence":70},"age_days":31,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-08-13T09:16:33+00:00","updated_at":"2026-08-27T13:47:27+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":45,"complexity":30,"support_request":null,"confidence":70,"impact":50,"quick_win":35.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":43088,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1666","title":"Source pull step doesn't retry on transient network failures","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/1666","summary":"Feature request to add retry-with-backoff to source pull operations (HTTP and git) to handle transient network failures. Unlabelled, no maintainer response after 24 days.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no maintainer comments, and no assignee after 24 days. While it's well-written with clear CI failure examples and a proposed solution, it hasn't been formally assessed or prioritized by a maintainer yet. The issue was created by an AI agent on behalf of a maintainer (lengau), suggesting awareness, but no triage has occurred.","scores":{"impact":75,"quick_win":33.75,"staleness":45,"complexity":55,"confidence":65,"support_request":15},"age_days":31,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-08-12T21:39:47+00:00","updated_at":"2026-08-12T21:39:47+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":45,"complexity":55,"support_request":15,"confidence":65,"impact":75,"quick_win":33.75,"has_related_links":false},{"id":4504,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"1171","title":"investigate: why do we need a separate layer for the .rock metadata?","author":"cjdcordeiro","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/1171","summary":"Investigation request to revisit why the .rock/metadata.yaml is packed as a separate OCI layer instead of being squashed with other parts. Open, 1 comment from a maintainer noting store ingestion implications; no labels or assignee.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is an open investigation request with no labels, no assignee, and only one comment (from @lengau on 2026-04-02) flagging that a separate layer could affect how the store team ingests rocks. The code path (set_control_data in rockcraft/oci.py) still adds the metadata as its own layer, so the question remains unresolved and needs triage/decision.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":13.5,"staleness":45,"complexity":55,"confidence":60,"support_request":5},"age_days":163,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-04-02T15:42:55+00:00","updated_at":"2026-04-02T20:22:32+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":45,"complexity":55,"support_request":5,"confidence":60,"impact":30,"quick_win":13.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":4156,"project_name":"imagecraft","source":"github","external_id":"311","title":"Add support for suite components to mmdebstrap plugin","author":"dilyn-corner","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/imagecraft/issues/311","summary":"Feature request to add an mmdebstrap-components option to imagecraft's mmdebstrap plugin. Maintainer noted mmdebstrap itself lacks components support and suggested an alternative bootstrap plugin (e.g. chisel). Unlabelled, no assignee, last activity 97 days ago.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer @steinbro substantively acknowledged the request (2026-05-27), citing the original PR #289 review discussion where mmdebstrap's lack of components support was already noted, and proposed a direction (alternative plugin like chisel). The request is valid and unresolved but blocked on an architectural decision (new bootstrap plugin), so it should stay open; a documented override-build workaround in the tutorial mitigates urgency.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":15.75,"staleness":45,"complexity":65,"confidence":78,"support_request":10},"age_days":169,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-03-27T21:52:27+00:00","updated_at":"2026-05-27T00:23:04+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":45,"complexity":65,"support_request":10,"confidence":78,"impact":45,"quick_win":15.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":4164,"project_name":"imagecraft","source":"github","external_id":"303","title":"Gadget snap extension","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/imagecraft/issues/303","summary":"Feature request to add a gadget snap extension that reads values from a local gadget snap and applies them to imagecraft.yaml, reducing duplication. Depends on implementing extensions support, which is not yet in the codebase. Open, unlabelled, one maintainer comment.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"This is a legitimate feature request filed by a maintainer (lengau) that addresses real duplication between gadget.yaml and imagecraft.yaml, with a customer comment reinforcing the need for feature-parity with ubuntu-image. The prerequisite (extensions support) is not yet implemented in the codebase, so the issue is blocked but still relevant. It has no labels or assignee, indicating it needs triage, but since a maintainer authored it and commented, it should remain open.","scores":{"impact":55,"quick_win":16.5,"staleness":45,"complexity":70,"confidence":75,"support_request":0},"age_days":171,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-03-25T17:51:01+00:00","updated_at":"2026-03-26T07:37:18+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":45,"complexity":70,"support_request":0,"confidence":75,"impact":55,"quick_win":16.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":15673,"project_name":"snapcraft-rocks","source":"github","external_id":"37","title":"Building snaps with `kde-neon` extension is not working","author":"hhromic","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft-rocks/issues/37","summary":"Snapcraft Docker images (ghcr.io/canonical/snapcraft:8_core22) fail to build snaps using the kde-neon extension: 'unable to determine source type of /usr/share/snapcraft/extensions/desktop/kde-neon'. Root cause is snapcraft's get_extensions_data_dir() hard-coding sys.prefix, which resolves to the wrong path in the Docker image. Confirmed still broken for core24/kde-neon-6 and GNOME in 2025.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"A maintainer (tigarmo) acknowledged the report and confirmed extensions 'probably need to do some work to support', and the reporter traced the root cause to snapcraft's get_extensions_data_dir() hard-coding sys.prefix. The issue was re-confirmed still broken in 2025 (core24/kde-neon-6 and GNOME), so it remains a valid, open bug. It is not stale-irrelevant and not a support question, so it should stay open pending a fix.","scores":{"impact":60,"quick_win":27.0,"staleness":45,"complexity":55,"confidence":70,"support_request":15},"age_days":867,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-04-28T21:48:59+00:00","updated_at":"2025-07-24T10:48:07+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":45,"complexity":55,"support_request":15,"confidence":70,"impact":60,"quick_win":27.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":4521,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"1154","title":"Pydantic warning: PydanticSerializationUnexpectedValue","author":"dimaqq","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/1154","summary":"PydanticSerializationUnexpectedValue warning emitted during Project.marshal() when rockcraft.yaml checks contain an ExecCheck entry. Maintainer reproduced it locally and narrowed it to a tagged-union serialization issue in the Check/ExecCheck model; no fix committed yet.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer gcomneno actively reproduced the warning and diagnosed it as a tagged-union serialization problem in the Check/ExecCheck model (last activity 153 days ago), so it is triaged and valid. The code still uses a custom pydantic.Discriminator(_get_check_tag) that only accepts Mapping input, which is why serialization of an ExecCheck instance triggers the warning; no fix commit exists yet.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":21.0,"staleness":45,"complexity":40,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":174,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-03-23T06:13:19+00:00","updated_at":"2026-03-31T14:24:22+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":45,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":35,"quick_win":21.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":4561,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"1114","title":"go-framework: fail early when no Go sources are present","author":"gcomneno","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/pull/1114","summary":"Adds go-framework extension validation to fail early when go.mod exists but no .go source files are present. Small diff (+49/-1, 2 files), CI passing, rebased on main. Pending maintainer review after 186 days with 3 author pings and zero maintainer engagement.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"The PR is small, follows the established validation pattern used by other extensions (expressjs, fastapi, gunicorn all have similar 'missing file' checks), CI passes, and the author has rebased onto current main with all focused tests passing (16 passed, Ruff clean). However, it has sat for 186 days with zero maintainer interaction despite three author follow-ups (May, June, August 2026). The change is still relevant — the current go.py _check_project only validates go.mod existence, not .go file presence — and the PR is mergeable, so it warrants a maintainer review rather than closure.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":21.25,"staleness":45,"complexity":15,"confidence":75},"age_days":198,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-02-26T17:32:35+00:00","updated_at":"2026-08-31T13:16:29+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":45,"complexity":15,"support_request":null,"confidence":75,"impact":25,"quick_win":21.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":21629,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1460","title":"`organize` with mapping like `{app: app/app}` when `app` is a directory not working as expected.","author":"javierdelapuente","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/1460","summary":"organize mapping {app: app/app} fails when app is a directory: link_or_copy_tree copies into app/app but shutil.rmtree(src) then deletes it. Workaround suggested but has edge cases.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"This is a valid bug in craft-parts where `organize` fails when moving a directory into a subdirectory of itself (e.g., {app: app/app}). A maintainer (@cmatsuoka) acknowledged the issue 10 days ago and suggested a glob workaround, but explicitly noted it has problematic edge cases. The issue has recent activity (contributor follow-up 0 days ago) and is related to rockcraft#892.","scores":{"impact":55,"quick_win":19.25,"staleness":40,"complexity":65,"confidence":75,"support_request":15},"age_days":208,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-02-17T07:24:38+00:00","updated_at":"2026-09-11T06:52:43+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":40,"complexity":65,"support_request":15,"confidence":75,"impact":55,"quick_win":19.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":5635,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"39","title":"Clean slate between rebuilds","author":"valentincanonical","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/39","summary":"rockcraft pack fails with 'path already exists' for /root/images/bare on rebuilds. The specific umoci init bug was fixed (commit d1a5f04); the broader clean-slate-between-rebuilds concern was identified as a craft-providers/craft-application layer issue. A 2026 triage comment asks whether a tracking issue exists upstream before closing as moved.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The original umoci init 'path already exists' bug is confirmed fixed in current code (shutil.rmtree before umoci init in oci.py new_oci_image). The 2026 triage comment (gcomneno) correctly identifies the remaining clean-environment concern as a provider-layer issue and conditionally suggests closing as moved only if a craft-providers tracking issue exists. No such tracking issue was found, so the issue remains valid and open pending that determination.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":17.5,"staleness":40,"complexity":65,"confidence":72,"support_request":10},"age_days":1577,"labels":[],"created_at":"2022-05-19T12:32:22+00:00","updated_at":"2026-03-18T17:11:38+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":40,"complexity":65,"support_request":10,"confidence":72,"impact":50,"quick_win":17.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":3084,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"1042","title":"add `charmcraft purge` or `charmcraft cleanall` command to clean all instances","author":"sed-i","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/1042","summary":"Feature request to add a `charmcraft purge` command to clean all LXD build containers and pip caches. Design discussion is active with multiple flag options proposed. Blocked by craft-providers#639.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has active design discussion with multiple maintainer proposals (lengau, paulomach, sed-i) and was explicitly marked as blocked by craft-providers#639 in August 2024. The underlying `purge` function already exists in craft-providers (lxd/project.py), but no `charmcraft purge` command is exposed in the charmcraft codebase. The issue is triaged, scoped, and awaiting the upstream dependency.","scores":{"impact":55,"quick_win":19.25,"staleness":40,"complexity":65,"confidence":72,"support_request":10},"age_days":1286,"labels":[],"created_at":"2023-03-06T17:38:57+00:00","updated_at":"2025-12-03T18:37:32+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":40,"complexity":65,"support_request":10,"confidence":72,"impact":55,"quick_win":19.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":39340,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"1093","title":"remote-build success message lists duplicate artifact names","author":"kirtisingh05","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/issues/1093","summary":"Duplicate artifact names in remote-build success message due to URL-keyed dict not deduplicating by filename. Valid bug with open PR craft-application#1094 addressing it.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"This is a valid bug with a clear root cause: artifact_downloads is keyed by URL so re-running remote-build adds duplicate paths to .values(). An open PR (craft-application#1094) addresses this exact issue with deduplication logic, so the issue should remain open until the fix is merged.","scores":{"impact":60,"quick_win":42.0,"staleness":40,"complexity":30,"confidence":80,"support_request":0},"age_days":88,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-06-16T20:11:07+00:00","updated_at":"2026-07-01T18:25:13+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":40,"complexity":30,"support_request":0,"confidence":80,"impact":60,"quick_win":42.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":21518,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1571","title":"Group related plugins","author":"steinbro","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/1571","summary":"Group plugins by language/ecosystem in docs and source code. Maintainer confirmed proposed groupings; contributor committed to a PR but none has been filed. Docs toctree remains a flat alphabetical list.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer steinbro explicitly agreed with all grouping corrections from contributor GreyViperTooth, who committed to submitting a PR. The docs/reference/plugins.rst toctree is still a flat alphabetical list, confirming the work is incomplete and the issue remains actionable.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":24.5,"staleness":40,"complexity":30,"confidence":80,"support_request":0},"age_days":128,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-05-07T12:54:34+00:00","updated_at":"2026-07-16T03:56:07+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":40,"complexity":30,"support_request":0,"confidence":80,"impact":35,"quick_win":24.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":5617,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"57","title":"Leftover files affecting consecutive runs of \"rockcraft pack\"","author":"tigarmo","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/57","summary":"Rockcraft pack fails on second run after fixing an organize typo: leftover install-dir files cause a cp hard-link 'File exists' error. Maintainer asked reporter to re-test with rockcraft clean between runs; awaiting response.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer @gcomneno triaged this on 2026-02-26 (186 days ago) and asked the reporter to re-test with `rockcraft clean` between runs, so the issue is acknowledged and awaiting a response from the original author. The underlying behavior (install dir not cleaned between runs, causing cp --link to fail on existing files) is a real craft_parts lifecycle concern, not just a usage question, and no fix commit or PR addressing it was found in rockcraft or craft-parts history.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":17.5,"staleness":40,"complexity":65,"confidence":65,"support_request":30},"age_days":1481,"labels":[],"created_at":"2022-08-23T13:55:47+00:00","updated_at":"2026-02-26T06:58:53+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":40,"complexity":65,"support_request":30,"confidence":65,"impact":50,"quick_win":17.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":40457,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"1118","title":"Add LP openstack driver to testing service","author":"cmatsuoka","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/issues/1118","summary":"Triaged feature request to add LP openstack driver support to the testing service, enabling environment detection and backend preparation for Launchpad testing.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is a triaged maintainer-requested feature to enable LP testing by detecting the environment and configuring the test backend. It is actively tracked internally (Jira CRAFT-5256) and aligns with the project's testing infrastructure goals, warranting its continued visibility.","scores":{"impact":60,"quick_win":33.0,"staleness":40,"complexity":45,"confidence":85,"support_request":0},"age_days":68,"labels":["Status: Triaged"],"created_at":"2026-07-06T14:37:14+00:00","updated_at":"2026-07-06T14:44:23+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":40,"complexity":45,"support_request":0,"confidence":85,"impact":60,"quick_win":33.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":42603,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2816","title":"`charmcraft pack` fails on Resolute","author":"jameinel","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/2816","summary":"charmcraft pack fails on Ubuntu Resolute 26.04 host with Jammy container due to AppArmor protocol incompatibility. Untriaged, no maintainer response.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no assignee, and zero maintainer comments despite being open 29 days. It presents a clear bug with reproduction steps and error logs showing AppArmor protocol incompatibility between Resolute 26.04 and Jammy 20.04 containers. A maintainer needs to assess whether this is a known limitation, a bug to fix, or if a workaround exists.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":20.0,"staleness":40,"complexity":60,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":36,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-08-07T16:41:38+00:00","updated_at":"2026-08-07T16:41:38+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":40,"complexity":60,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":50,"quick_win":20.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":41835,"project_name":"imagecraft","source":"github","external_id":"379","title":"[Feature] Support non-EFI ARM and RISC-V booting via U-Boot (extlinux.conf / boot.scr)","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/imagecraft/issues/379","summary":"Feature request to add U-Boot support (extlinux.conf, boot.scr, raw SPL) for non-EFI ARM and RISC-V boards. Currently untriaged with no maintainer interaction.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is a new feature request with no labels, assignee, or maintainer comments. It proposes a significant architectural addition (U-Boot boot configuration) to the existing GRUB-based system, requiring triage and planning before implementation.","scores":{"impact":70,"quick_win":14.0,"staleness":40,"complexity":80,"confidence":80,"support_request":0},"age_days":53,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-07-21T15:45:22+00:00","updated_at":"2026-07-21T15:45:22+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":40,"complexity":80,"support_request":0,"confidence":80,"impact":70,"quick_win":14.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":41572,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"2161190","title":"Rebuild fails because of 'version' can be set only once","author":"~t-a-k","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2161190","summary":"Incremental snapcraft pack fails with craftctl set version error due to craft-parts write-once restriction. Requires snapcraft clean. Unlabelled, 0 comments, awaiting triage.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue reports a concrete build failure during incremental snapcraft pack caused by craft-parts' write-once restriction on project variables. It has no labels, assignees, or maintainer comments, so it requires initial triage to determine if this is a snapcraft state-management bug or expected behavior requiring documentation.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":35.0,"staleness":40,"complexity":30,"confidence":60,"support_request":40},"age_days":56,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-07-18T12:34:20.983294+00:00","updated_at":"2026-07-18T12:34:20.983294+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":40,"complexity":30,"support_request":40,"confidence":60,"impact":50,"quick_win":35.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":22315,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"770","title":"NPM Plugin: wrong node version is used to build the package","author":"dimaqq","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/770","summary":"npm plugin silently ignores npm-node-version when override-build is used, falling back to old system node. Maintainer confirmed root cause (no way to inject setup commands with override-build), provided workaround, and raised architectural question about pre-build hooks. Awaiting design input from maintainers.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer @cmatsuoka confirmed the root cause 9 days ago: 'there's no way to inject setup commands when override-build is used', provided a concrete workaround, and explicitly asked @lengau and @tigarmo for architectural input on a pre-build hook solution. The issue is triaged (Jira CRAFT-3124), valid, and awaiting a design decision that cannot be resolved without maintainer consensus.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":11.25,"staleness":40,"complexity":75,"confidence":82,"support_request":20},"age_days":800,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-07-05T01:08:39+00:00","updated_at":"2026-08-22T14:04:42+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":40,"complexity":75,"support_request":20,"confidence":82,"impact":45,"quick_win":11.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":13072,"project_name":"craft-archives","source":"github","external_id":"222","title":"fix: handle installer tests on non-LTS Ubuntu and Debian releases","author":"Copilot","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-archives/pull/222","summary":"Small +4/-3 fix to installer tests: replaces direct dict access with .get() and adds distro.id() check to avoid KeyError on non-LTS Ubuntu/Debian. All CI passing, pending review (0 reviewers). Last activity 48 days ago.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"All 10 CI checks pass and the diff is a trivial 4-line test fix, but it has sat with 0 reviewers for ~5 months. Merged PR #115 (canonical/craft-archives#115) already made cloud archive tests optional by distro, so a maintainer should confirm whether this smaller .get() fix is still needed or redundant before merging.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":27.0,"staleness":40,"complexity":10,"confidence":65},"age_days":169,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-03-27T22:49:23+00:00","updated_at":"2026-07-14T20:53:51+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":40,"complexity":10,"support_request":null,"confidence":65,"impact":30,"quick_win":27.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":39108,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"6282","title":"Job for systemd-resolved.service failed because the control process exited with error code","author":"freyes","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/6282","summary":"snapcraft pack --use-lxd fails on Ubuntu 26.04 when restarting systemd-resolved in the LXD container. Issue has no maintainer response.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"Valid bug report with clear reproduction steps and logs showing a crash in `craft-providers` during LXD container setup. No maintainer interaction yet. The issue involves a development release (Ubuntu 26.04), which may require investigation to distinguish between a devel-image quirk and a genuine regression in `snapcraft`/`craft-providers`.","scores":{"impact":70,"quick_win":35.0,"staleness":40,"complexity":50,"confidence":75,"support_request":10},"age_days":95,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-06-09T17:35:24+00:00","updated_at":"2026-06-09T17:35:59+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":40,"complexity":50,"support_request":10,"confidence":75,"impact":70,"quick_win":35.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":39817,"project_name":"craft-providers","source":"github","external_id":"212","title":"Incorrectly handling SNAPCRAFT_MAX_PARALLEL_BUILD_COUNT","author":"stolk","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-providers/issues/212","summary":"Issue with SNAPCRAFT_MAX_PARALLEL_BUILD_COUNT handling and incorrect CPU counts in Multipass. Maintainer is addressing via craft-application integration.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The maintainer explicitly stated they are working on a solution via integration with craft-application and will close the issue once that support is available in snapcraft for core24. The issue is triaged and part of an ongoing architectural effort.","scores":{"impact":80,"quick_win":24.0,"staleness":40,"complexity":70,"confidence":80,"support_request":10},"age_days":1313,"labels":["Type: Bug"],"created_at":"2023-02-07T22:13:58+00:00","updated_at":"2026-04-22T02:48:04+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":40,"complexity":70,"support_request":10,"confidence":80,"impact":80,"quick_win":24.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":40628,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"6330","title":"snapcraft 9.0.1's rust plugin stopped auto-provisioning rustup","author":"oleksandr-balyshyn","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/6330","summary":"Regression in snapcraft 9.0.1 where the rust plugin stops auto-provisioning rustup, breaking builds with 'rustup' not found. Requires triage in craft-parts.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue reports a clear regression in the rust plugin where snapcraft 9.0.1 fails to provision rustup, causing builds to break. Code analysis of craft-parts shows a mismatch between get_build_snaps() (which skips rustup if system rustc is detected) and the environment validator (which still expects rustup). This needs maintainer triage to align the logic and release a fix.","scores":{"impact":80,"quick_win":48.0,"staleness":40,"complexity":40,"confidence":85,"support_request":0},"age_days":66,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-07-08T22:48:53+00:00","updated_at":"2026-09-05T17:56:18+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":40,"complexity":40,"support_request":0,"confidence":85,"impact":80,"quick_win":48.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":5920,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"5997","title":"Stage package filtering doesn't deal with foreign arch packages (e.g. i386 on amd64)","author":"Saviq","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/5997","summary":"Stage package filtering in craft-parts deb.py matches by name only, ignoring architecture, so foreign-arch packages (e.g. i386 on amd64) pull in duplicate content like all of libc6. Confirmed still present on core26; maintainer says it is a design-first task needing craft-team coordination.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer @mr-cal (2026-07-02) explicitly acknowledged this as a valid bug requiring a design-first approach by a craft team member, and @Saviq confirmed the behaviour still reproduces on core26. The underlying code (_get_filtered_stage_package_names in craft-parts deb.py) still performs name-only matching, so the bug is unfixed. It is triaged, scoped, and awaiting architectural design, so it should remain open.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":13.5,"staleness":40,"complexity":70,"confidence":80,"support_request":5},"age_days":226,"labels":["Type: Bug"],"created_at":"2026-01-30T09:29:14+00:00","updated_at":"2026-07-02T16:30:56+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":40,"complexity":70,"support_request":5,"confidence":80,"impact":45,"quick_win":13.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":1475,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2671","title":"docs: fix parameter names showing as None in CLI usage docs","author":"Copilot","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/pull/2671","summary":"Fixes gen_cli_docs.py so required-argument metavars fall back to argparse conventions (dest / dest.upper()) instead of rendering as <None> in CLI usage docs. +10/-1 in one file; approved, CI green except pre-existing infra failures; unmerged ~51 days.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"The PR is approved with 0 unresolved comments and the underlying bug is verified still present at HEAD (action.metavar used directly in required.append, issues #2578 and #2642 both still open), so it is ready to land and just needs a maintainer to merge. Failing CI checks (snap-store-tests, snap-tests 20.04/22.04/25.10/26.04, OSV-scanner) are documented in the body as pre-existing infrastructure/upstream issues (expired Charmhub credentials, craft_providers snapd init per #2509, transient apt failures), not regressions from this change. Slight uncertainty remains on why an approved PR has sat unmerged for ~51 days and on whether the OSV-scanner failure is truly pre-existing.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":27.0,"staleness":40,"complexity":10,"confidence":80},"age_days":144,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-04-22T04:48:08+00:00","updated_at":"2026-07-08T21:02:05+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":40,"complexity":10,"support_request":null,"confidence":80,"impact":30,"quick_win":27.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":43872,"project_name":"starbase","source":"github","external_id":"589","title":"Version test rejects dirty suffix in version strings","author":"lengaubot","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/starbase/issues/589","summary":"test_version_with_tags rejects dirty suffix in version strings, causing CI failures on dirty working trees. Untriaged, no maintainer response.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no maintainer comments, no assignee, and shows no sign of having been assessed or prioritized. It's a clear bug report with specific reproduction details (expected regex vs actual version string) and references a similar fix in craft-application#864.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":34.0,"staleness":40,"complexity":15,"confidence":65,"support_request":10},"age_days":25,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-08-18T13:39:58+00:00","updated_at":"2026-08-18T13:39:58+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":40,"complexity":15,"support_request":10,"confidence":65,"impact":40,"quick_win":34.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":22437,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"647","title":"apt package cache marks packages that don't exist","author":"mr-cal","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/647","summary":"craft-parts marks a stage-package then fails with PackageNotFound, suspected stale apt cache or python-apt misuse; unreproducible. Maintainer noted in Feb 2026 it could be solved by PR #1446 (merged two-pass mark_packages fix).","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The reporter could not reproduce the failure, and the maintainer's only substantive comment (2026-02-10) links PR #1446, which was merged (cf118b5f) and reworks mark_packages into a two-pass candidate-then-mark flow. However, the reported symptom (PackageNotFound for libpython3.11-stdlib:arm64 after apt-get update) is not clearly the same as #1446's versioned-interdependency bug, so the fix is unconfirmed and the issue should stay open pending verification.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":22.5,"staleness":40,"complexity":55,"confidence":60,"support_request":10},"age_days":953,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-02-02T17:55:34+00:00","updated_at":"2026-02-10T18:40:09+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":40,"complexity":55,"support_request":10,"confidence":60,"impact":50,"quick_win":22.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":13327,"project_name":"craft-cli","source":"github","external_id":"413","title":"`humanize_list` accepts any value that can be coerced to a string for the last list item","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-cli/issues/413","summary":"humanize_list silently coerces non-string items instead of raising TypeError, inconsistently by position. Maintainer acknowledged it as a real bug but deferred to a future Rust oxidization; a contributor reproduced it on main and awaits direction on intended behavior.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer lengau explicitly acknowledged it as a real bug (\"While this is a real bug\") and deferred it to a future oxidization, and contributor hericlibong reproduced it on current main (2026-05-17) and is now awaiting a decision on intended behavior (require strings vs accept stringifiable) while offering to help. It is still reproducible on main and last activity was ~3.5 months ago, so it is neither stale nor unassessed.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":10.8,"staleness":38,"complexity":28,"confidence":72,"support_request":5},"age_days":233,"labels":["Type: Bug"],"created_at":"2026-01-22T22:09:48+00:00","updated_at":"2026-05-17T16:52:06+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":38,"complexity":28,"support_request":5,"confidence":72,"impact":15,"quick_win":10.8,"has_related_links":true},{"id":3047,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"1079","title":"Do not ignore symlinks to external files","author":"sed-i","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/1079","summary":"Request to include symlinks pointing outside the charm project directory in packed charms (monorepo shared files). Behavior is intentional and tested; a recent experimental monorepo build-root feature (PR #2836) may address the underlying use case.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer @lengau (2024-09-20) triaged this as a complex craft-parts/craft-providers interaction where the build container cannot access links outside the project dir, and @luissimas (2024-12-04) confirmed an active monorepo use case. The ignore behavior is intentional and tested (charm_builder.py:117, test_build_generics_symlink_*_outside), so it is not a bug, but the recent CHARMCRAFT_EXPERIMENTAL_MONOREPO feature (#2836) suggests the project is actively working toward supporting this, so it should stay open.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":12.5,"staleness":35,"complexity":75,"confidence":60,"support_request":20},"age_days":1244,"labels":[],"created_at":"2023-04-17T22:13:43+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:17:36+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":35,"complexity":75,"support_request":20,"confidence":60,"impact":50,"quick_win":12.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":6431,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"5448","title":"Add deprecation warning for the `snap_daemon` system username","author":"mr-cal","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/5448","summary":"Enhancement to emit a deprecation warning when the deprecated `snap_daemon` system username is used in snapcraft.yaml. Triaged by a maintainer; an open PR (#6250) explicitly fixes it and is pending review with CI failing.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is triaged (labels 'Status: Triaged', 'Type: Enhancement') and is being actively addressed by open PR snapcraft#6250, which states it 'Fixes snapcraft#5448' and adds a SystemUsernames pydantic model plus a runtime warning via craft-cli. The repo's project.py still defines system_usernames as a plain dict with no deprecation model, confirming the fix is not yet merged, so the issue should remain open until the PR lands.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":21.0,"staleness":35,"complexity":40,"confidence":80,"support_request":0},"age_days":501,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2025-04-29T15:14:32+00:00","updated_at":"2025-04-29T15:17:20+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":35,"complexity":40,"support_request":0,"confidence":80,"impact":35,"quick_win":21.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":7517,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"4360","title":"Add \"--base=core2x\"\" option to \"snapcraft extensions\"","author":null,"issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/4360","summary":"Feature request to add a --base= option to the snapcraft extensions command, mirroring snapcraft plugins. Still unimplemented in the codebase. Labeled good first issue; a contributor recently asked to be assigned.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is triaged (labels: good first issue, Status: Triaged, Type: Enhancement) and the feature is confirmed still missing: ExtensionsCommand in snapcraft/commands/extensions.py has no --base argument, while PluginsCommand in snapcraft/commands/plugins.py does. A contributor asked to be assigned 42 days ago, so it is actively of interest and should remain open.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":20.0,"staleness":35,"complexity":20,"confidence":85,"support_request":0},"age_days":1100,"labels":["good first issue","Status: Triaged","Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2023-09-08T15:05:12+00:00","updated_at":"2026-07-20T13:07:18+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":35,"complexity":20,"support_request":0,"confidence":85,"impact":25,"quick_win":20.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":22364,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"721","title":"fix(part_handler): fetch correct target stage packages","author":"dilyn-corner","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/pull/721","summary":"Fixes cross-compilation stage-package fetching to use target architecture. Approved with 1 unresolved review comment; regression testing requested but not yet confirmed.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"The PR has 1 approval but 1 unresolved review comment from lengau requesting regression testing against LP #1983009 before merging. Recent activity (4 days ago) shows ongoing engagement, but the unresolved comment and missing regression test confirmation need addressing before the PR can be merged.","scores":{"impact":65,"quick_win":29.25,"staleness":35,"complexity":55,"confidence":70},"age_days":869,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-04-26T17:26:18+00:00","updated_at":"2026-09-01T13:20:25+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":35,"complexity":55,"support_request":null,"confidence":70,"impact":65,"quick_win":29.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":1560,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2582","title":"docs: Guidance on charm naming best practices could be clearer","author":"YanisaHS","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/2582","summary":"Docs request to clarify charm vs repository naming conventions in charmcraft docs; maintainer acknowledged and PR #2748 improved naming docs with links to detailed guidance, addressing the core confusion.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer @dwilding committed on 2026-03-09 to tackle the improvements as part of roadmap work, and PR #2748 (commit 0389aeb4) already improved the naming docs with links to detailed guidance. However, the issue also raised a secondary concern about `charmcraft init` defaulting to the directory name (e.g. `foo-operator`) which contradicts best practices — this behavioral aspect may still need addressing, so the issue should remain open until that is resolved or explicitly dismissed.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":29.75,"staleness":35,"complexity":15,"confidence":75,"support_request":30},"age_days":190,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-03-06T15:11:12+00:00","updated_at":"2026-03-09T03:02:02+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":35,"complexity":15,"support_request":30,"confidence":75,"impact":35,"quick_win":29.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":1709,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2428","title":"docs: dedicated doc for uploading of OCI images","author":"sed-i","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/2428","summary":"Request for a dedicated doc on uploading OCI images as charm resources, plus two reported gaps: skopeo digest method failing with 'Unknown OCI image reference' and multi-arch images listing only amd64. Triaged; maintainer suggested a 'rock as resource' doc; reporter noted --help text conflicts with docs.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is triaged (Status: Triaged, Type: Documentation/Enhancement) and a maintainer (lengau) gave concrete direction: start with a 'How to upload a rock as a resource' doc, noting multi-arch OCI upload is complex. The underlying multi-arch bug appears addressed by merged PR #2037 ('fix: upload all images (not just current arch) with skopeo'), but the dedicated doc and the --help/docs inconsistency (help says 'exclude sha256:' while docs allow long-form digests) remain open, with the reporter's latest comment only 73 days ago.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":22.0,"staleness":35,"complexity":45,"confidence":70,"support_request":30},"age_days":390,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Documentation","Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2025-08-19T04:03:22+00:00","updated_at":"2026-06-19T08:05:35+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":35,"complexity":45,"support_request":30,"confidence":70,"impact":40,"quick_win":22.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":5542,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"132","title":"Rockcraft wipes working directory","author":"jardon","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/132","summary":"Rockcraft's organize key can wipe the host working directory when a user maps /root/project (the project mountpoint) to another path. Maintainer agreed a safeguard is needed; no fix found yet, and a contributor offered to take it on in March 2026.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer tigarmo explicitly agreed the behavior is undesirable and that a safeguard should be added (\"we'll do something for sure\"), and a contributor offered to take it on in the latest comment (2026-03-18). No fix has been merged in rockcraft; the related craft-parts fix (#1562, reject organize sources outside install dir) may partially address it but is not confirmed to cover the /root/project mountpoint case, so the issue remains valid and actionable.","scores":{"impact":55,"quick_win":30.25,"staleness":35,"complexity":45,"confidence":70,"support_request":20},"age_days":1422,"labels":[],"created_at":"2022-10-21T13:11:53+00:00","updated_at":"2026-03-18T17:52:54+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":35,"complexity":45,"support_request":20,"confidence":70,"impact":55,"quick_win":30.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":22234,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"851","title":"Removed files from local sources remain in the part","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/851","summary":"Bug: files deleted from a local source directory are not removed from the part's src directory on a second pull. Triaged; a maintainer provided a reproducer branch and failing unit test, awaiting implementation. Bug still present in current code.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is triaged (Status: Triaged, Type: Bug labels) and a maintainer recently (97 days ago) posted a reproducer branch 'repro/851-local-source-deleted-files' with a failing test 'test_pulling_twice_removes_deleted_source_files' that was validated to fail pre-fix, so it is actively being worked toward a fix. I confirmed in craft_parts/sources/local_source.py that pull() and update() still have no deleted-file handling, so the bug remains unfixed and the issue should stay open.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":27.5,"staleness":35,"complexity":45,"confidence":85,"support_request":0},"age_days":722,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Bug"],"created_at":"2024-09-20T19:53:59+00:00","updated_at":"2026-05-26T16:40:13+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":35,"complexity":45,"support_request":0,"confidence":85,"impact":50,"quick_win":27.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":6202,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"5684","title":"Support a `-f|--file` or `-C|--directory` flag","author":"dilyn-corner","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/5684","summary":"Feature request to add a -f/--file or -C/--directory flag to snapcraft lifecycle subcommands so users can specify an alternate snapcraft.yaml or project directory, enabling monorepo/variant builds. Maintainers discussed it in Aug 2025, noting snapcraft pack dir/ currently packs a directory (unhelpful) and that removing that behavior is a candidate for Snapcraft 9.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainers actively engaged in Aug 2025: @mr-cal flagged it as a candidate for Snapcraft 9 and noted @sergiusens suggested removing the confusing `snapcraft pack dir/` behavior, with a plan to notify goreleaser. The feature is not implemented (no --file/--directory flag in the codebase), and it's a well-scoped enhancement with clear rationale for monorepo support.","scores":{"impact":55,"quick_win":16.5,"staleness":35,"complexity":70,"confidence":75,"support_request":10},"age_days":401,"labels":["Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2025-08-07T20:15:03+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-12T13:39:31+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":35,"complexity":70,"support_request":10,"confidence":75,"impact":55,"quick_win":16.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":44785,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"1347","title":"fix(tests): skip apt-backed lifecycle test when python3-apt is unavailable","author":"lengau","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/pull/1347","summary":"Skips apt-backed lifecycle test when python3-apt bindings are unavailable, preventing spurious test failures in non-distro environments.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"This is a small, well-scoped fix (+13/-0 lines, 1 file) that addresses a real test failure when python3-apt bindings are unavailable. The author (a maintainer) has validated it locally. However, it has had 0 reviewers and no activity in 11 days, so it needs maintainer review before merging.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":21.25,"staleness":35,"complexity":15,"confidence":75},"age_days":18,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-08-25T20:30:49+00:00","updated_at":"2026-08-25T20:32:51+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":35,"complexity":15,"support_request":null,"confidence":75,"impact":25,"quick_win":21.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":43193,"project_name":"imagecraft","source":"github","external_id":"415","title":"feat(grub): install EFI GRUB without loop devices","author":"lengau","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/imagecraft/pull/415","summary":"PR converts EFI/GPT GRUB installation to use FUSE partition mounts instead of kernel loop devices, enabling unprivileged image builds. Has 11 unresolved review comments and some failing CI slow tests.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"This PR has 11 unresolved review comments and 0 reviewers, indicating it needs maintainer attention. The last activity was 4 days ago, suggesting active development. CI shows failing slow tests on ubuntu-26.04-arm and ubuntu-24.04 that need investigation before merge.","scores":{"impact":70,"quick_win":17.5,"staleness":35,"complexity":75,"confidence":70},"age_days":31,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-08-13T07:40:25+00:00","updated_at":"2026-09-02T00:02:35+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":35,"complexity":75,"support_request":null,"confidence":70,"impact":70,"quick_win":17.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":6773,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"5106","title":"fix(expand-extensions): use the Application's project","author":"lengau","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/pull/5106","summary":"Fixes expand-extensions to use Application's project instead of re-parsing. Approved by 1 reviewer with 2 unresolved comments; merge conflicts resolved 3 days ago via copilot.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"The PR has 1 approval but 2 unresolved review comments from @mr-cal regarding pydantic validator behavior. Although merge conflicts were auto-resolved 3 days ago, the unresolved review feedback needs maintainer attention before landing.","scores":{"impact":55,"quick_win":30.25,"staleness":35,"complexity":45,"confidence":70},"age_days":703,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-10-09T23:31:05+00:00","updated_at":"2026-09-02T15:26:30+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":35,"complexity":45,"support_request":null,"confidence":70,"impact":55,"quick_win":30.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":39396,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1609","title":"Unwanted source files copy in `build`","author":"imatrisciano","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/1609","summary":"nil plugin copies source files into build directory unnecessarily, wasting disk space for large files. Maintainer proposed static-assets plugin or hardlink-source attribute; neither implemented yet.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer @mr-cal has actively engaged, acknowledging the issue and proposing concrete solutions (static-assets plugin or hardlink-source build attribute). The author responded positively to the proposed approach. No implementation has begun yet, but the issue is triaged and under active discussion.","scores":{"impact":75,"quick_win":33.75,"staleness":35,"complexity":55,"confidence":75,"support_request":10},"age_days":99,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-06-05T14:42:47+00:00","updated_at":"2026-06-11T08:29:24+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":35,"complexity":55,"support_request":10,"confidence":75,"impact":75,"quick_win":33.75,"has_related_links":false},{"id":42256,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"6372","title":"feat(remote-build): add --project-dir argument to support build paths","author":"Tejas-Raj01","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/pull/6372","summary":"Adds --project-dir argument to snapcraft remote-build for monorepo support. Under active review with maintainer suggesting alternative approaches using build-path or upstream monorepo feature.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The PR is under active review with maintainer mr-cal providing feedback on September 4, suggesting the build-path approach or upstream craft-application#1109 monorepo feature as alternatives. The author indicated they would push updates after the August 24 feedback. The PR needs further development to address the maintainer's concerns about the os.chdir approach.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":22.5,"staleness":35,"complexity":55,"confidence":75},"age_days":50,"labels":["PR: Run Manual Spread"],"created_at":"2026-07-25T09:27:54+00:00","updated_at":"2026-09-04T14:05:51+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":35,"complexity":55,"support_request":null,"confidence":75,"impact":50,"quick_win":22.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":3265,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"861","title":"No support for paralell builds for multi-base charms","author":"fnordahl","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/861","summary":"Feature request to add optional parallel builds for multi-base charms (e.g. a --base-build-concurrency option). Triaged and acknowledged by maintainers as a valid enhancement; still open and unimplemented, with a recent 2025 comment noting it is a full cycle of work for the craft ecosystem.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is labeled Status: Triaged / Type: Enhancement and has maintainer engagement: facundobatista proposed a `charm-base-build-concurrency` option (default 1, disallowed in destructive mode) and flagged the terminal-output/log-prefixing problem, and a 2025-09-17 comment confirms it is still wanted but 'a full cycle's worth of work'. Code inspection confirms no concurrency support exists (no ThreadPool/concurrency in the pack path; --bases-index is still sequential), so it is not implemented and remains relevant.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":12.5,"staleness":35,"complexity":75,"confidence":80,"support_request":10},"age_days":1460,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2022-09-13T10:17:05+00:00","updated_at":"2025-09-17T20:32:50+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":35,"complexity":75,"support_request":10,"confidence":80,"impact":50,"quick_win":12.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":41201,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1644","title":"Add explanation for how `organize` works","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/1644","summary":"Documentation improvement to add an explanation page for the `organize` feature, clarifying its lifecycle and file mapping semantics. A contributor has volunteered to implement it.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"This is a valid documentation improvement created by maintainer lengau, with a contributor (@gcomneno) who has volunteered and outlined a clear implementation plan 22 days ago. The issue is actively being worked on and should remain open.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":33.75,"staleness":35,"complexity":25,"confidence":75,"support_request":15},"age_days":59,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-07-15T17:45:36+00:00","updated_at":"2026-08-13T19:37:54+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":35,"complexity":25,"support_request":15,"confidence":75,"impact":45,"quick_win":33.75,"has_related_links":false},{"id":44613,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1691","title":"fix(validator): use stdout for command output","author":"gcomneno","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/pull/1691","summary":"Fixes Go plugin env validation by returning stdout instead of stderr from _execute(). Closes #1447. Has passing CI and regression tests; awaiting maintainer review.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"This is a small, focused bug fix (+18/-2 lines) addressing issue #1447 where Go plugin validation fails when `go version` triggers a toolchain auto-download. The PR has passing CI (the s390x failure is a pre-existing issue on main), includes regression tests, and the author has addressed review feedback. However, no maintainer has reviewed it yet (0 reviewers, pending status), so it needs maintainer review before merging.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":38.25,"staleness":35,"complexity":15,"confidence":75},"age_days":20,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-08-24T05:27:31+00:00","updated_at":"2026-08-29T12:18:35+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":35,"complexity":15,"support_request":null,"confidence":75,"impact":45,"quick_win":38.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":1460,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2686","title":"`charmcraft pack` Internal error on a 26.04 host","author":"panlinux","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/2686","summary":"charmcraft pack crashes on Ubuntu 26.04 hosts with ValueError '26.04' is not a valid BuilddBaseAlias, raised in craft-providers' guest-compatibility check. Maintainer confirmed latest edge fixes it; main now pins craft-providers >=3.7.1 which includes the fix.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"This is a genuine bug (pack is unusable on a brand-new LTS host) that a maintainer acknowledged: st3v3nmw noted 'Using the version from the latest edge seems to fix this'. The fix lives in craft-providers, and charmcraft main already pins craft-providers >=3.7.1 (released 2026-07-02, after the 2026-05-07 report), so it should stay open until the fix ships in a stable/candidate snap release.","scores":{"impact":65,"quick_win":45.5,"staleness":35,"complexity":30,"confidence":80,"support_request":5},"age_days":128,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-05-07T19:16:15+00:00","updated_at":"2026-05-21T12:28:16+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":35,"complexity":30,"support_request":5,"confidence":80,"impact":65,"quick_win":45.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":43003,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"6381","title":"Openstack spread tests randomly fail with `Failed to run: /snap/lxd/current/sbin/lxd forkstart`","author":"mr-cal","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/6381","summary":"Intermittent LXD forkstart failures on shared Openstack infrastructure affecting all craft repos' spread tests (<0.5% failure rate); being tracked upstream at LXD #18857.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is well-documented with reproduction steps and LXD logs, has active maintainer engagement (mr-cal opened, lengau replicated with multipass under disk I/O pressure), and is being tracked upstream at canonical/lxd#18857. The intermittent nature (<0.5% failure rate) and infrastructure-specific cause (resource contention on shared Openstack) require ongoing investigation.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":15.75,"staleness":35,"complexity":65,"confidence":75,"support_request":15},"age_days":31,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-08-12T16:53:18+00:00","updated_at":"2026-08-13T15:33:57+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":35,"complexity":65,"support_request":15,"confidence":75,"impact":45,"quick_win":15.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":5919,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"5998","title":"`primed-stage-packages` in `manifest.yaml` loses architecture information","author":"Saviq","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/5998","summary":"primed-stage-packages in manifest.yaml drops foreign-arch qualifiers (e.g. :i386) while stage-packages keeps them. Root cause is in craft-parts origin tracking; a craft-parts PR (#1558) has since fixed it.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"A maintainer (gcomneno) triaged this on 2026-03-21 and identified the root cause as cross-repo: craft-parts' origin tracking uses `dpkg-deb --show --showformat=${Package}=${Version}`, dropping the `:i386`/`:armhf` qualifier. A craft-parts commit (0b6a556a, PR #1558) titled 'packages: preserve architecture in primed stage packages' appears to address exactly this, so the issue should stay open pending verification that the fix is released in a snapcraft-supported craft-parts version.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"staleness":35,"complexity":40,"confidence":80,"support_request":5},"age_days":225,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-01-30T16:07:54+00:00","updated_at":"2026-03-21T08:34:18+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":35,"complexity":40,"support_request":5,"confidence":80,"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":41476,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"1306","title":"build(deps): update github actions (main) (major)","author":"renovate","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/pull/1306","summary":"Renovate PR updating multiple GitHub Actions to major versions. Most CI passing, but source-spread-tests and docs-spread-tests are failing. Automerge enabled.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"This is a standard Renovate dependency update with automerge enabled, but two spread tests (source-spread-tests, docs-spread-tests) are failing and need investigation before merging. The PR has no reviewer comments and needs maintainer review to determine if the test failures are caused by the action updates.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":29.75,"staleness":35,"complexity":15,"confidence":75},"age_days":56,"labels":["PR: Dependencies"],"created_at":"2026-07-18T10:40:04+00:00","updated_at":"2026-09-13T03:21:36+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":35,"complexity":15,"support_request":null,"confidence":75,"impact":35,"quick_win":29.75,"has_related_links":false},{"id":39813,"project_name":"craft-providers","source":"github","external_id":"907","title":"Rename base instances to template instances","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-providers/issues/907","summary":"Rename 'base instance' to 'template instance' across craft_providers public API. Acknowledged by maintainer as a breaking change for the next major release.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has been triaged with the 'Type: Enhancement' label and acknowledged by maintainer @cmatsuoka, who noted it's a breaking API change to be addressed in the next major release. The issue is clearly scoped with specific API surfaces listed (Provider class methods, hookutil module, LXDInstance methods, instance name prefixes), and should remain open for implementation when a major version is planned.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":17.5,"staleness":35,"complexity":65,"confidence":75,"support_request":5},"age_days":213,"labels":["Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2026-02-11T17:37:48+00:00","updated_at":"2026-08-28T20:34:22+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":35,"complexity":65,"support_request":5,"confidence":75,"impact":50,"quick_win":17.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":41227,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1647","title":"ci: skip tests on documentation-only PRs","author":"Copilot","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/pull/1647","summary":"Adds CI path filtering to skip tests on documentation-only PRs, mirroring charmcraft's approach. Maintainer requested a test PR (#1648) to verify the filtering works.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer @lengau actively engaged by requesting a test PR (#1648) to verify the filtering mechanism, and Copilot created that follow-up PR. The PR has 10 unresolved review comments indicating ongoing review cycles. CI failures (OSV-scanner, java plugins on noble/s390x and ppc64el, lint/files) appear to be pre-existing infrastructure issues rather than caused by this PR's changes.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":30.0,"staleness":35,"complexity":25,"confidence":70},"age_days":59,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-07-15T21:32:59+00:00","updated_at":"2026-07-15T21:43:12+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":35,"complexity":25,"support_request":null,"confidence":70,"impact":40,"quick_win":30.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":41404,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"6358","title":"Mediate creation of snap hook and gui assets.","author":"cmatsuoka","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/6358","summary":"Feature request to mediate snap hook and gui assets creation using craft-application 7.1.0 mediation API. Appears implemented in PR #6379.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The feature has been implemented in commit bdbf07385 (PR #6379) with message 'feat: mediate creation of hooks and gui assets'. The issue is no longer relevant as the requested functionality is now available. The implementation uses the craft-application mediation API as specified in the issue body.","scores":{"impact":70,"quick_win":28.0,"staleness":35,"complexity":60,"confidence":85,"support_request":0},"age_days":57,"labels":["Status: Triaged"],"created_at":"2026-07-17T17:48:14+00:00","updated_at":"2026-07-17T17:48:22+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":35,"complexity":60,"support_request":0,"confidence":85,"impact":70,"quick_win":28.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":41826,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2806","title":"Document need to recreate token due to Ubuntu One migration (invalid macaroon)","author":"rene-oromtz","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/2806","summary":"Documentation request to warn users about token recreation needed after Ubuntu One migration from Candid (PR #2760). Triaged, internal ticket CHARMCRAFT-719 created.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"This is a valid, triaged documentation request (labeled 'Status: Triaged' and 'Type: Documentation') following the merged PR #2760 that migrated auth from Candid to Ubuntu One. An internal ticket (CHARMCRAFT-719) was created to track the documentation update. The issue should remain open until the documentation is updated in the Release Notes and/or charmcraft login page as requested.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":34.0,"staleness":35,"complexity":15,"confidence":80,"support_request":10},"age_days":53,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Documentation"],"created_at":"2026-07-21T15:02:25+00:00","updated_at":"2026-07-21T17:31:14+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":35,"complexity":15,"support_request":10,"confidence":80,"impact":40,"quick_win":34.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":42345,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2814","title":"feat(profile): add secrets handling to kubernetes and machine init profiles","author":"tonyandrewmeyer","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/pull/2814","summary":"Adds secrets handling to kubernetes and machine init profiles with unit and integration tests. Approved by 3 reviewers but has 4 unresolved comments and some CI failures.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"The PR has been approved by 3 reviewers but still has 4 unresolved review comments and CI failures on snap-tests (ubuntu-20.04-64, ubuntu-22.04-64, ubuntu-25.10-64). Maintainer review is needed to address these remaining issues before merging.","scores":{"impact":60,"quick_win":27.0,"staleness":35,"complexity":55,"confidence":75},"age_days":48,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-07-27T09:20:58+00:00","updated_at":"2026-08-26T04:36:45+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":35,"complexity":55,"support_request":null,"confidence":75,"impact":60,"quick_win":27.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":44031,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1673","title":"ci: run tests on Ubuntu 26.04","author":"lengau","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/pull/1673","summary":"Adds Ubuntu 26.04 CI testing with Python 3.14. Approved by 2 reviewers but the new ubuntu-26.04 slow tests CI check is failing.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"PR has 2 approvals but the new Ubuntu 26.04 slow tests CI check is failing. A maintainer should evaluate whether the test failures are acceptable, need fixing, or indicate a broader compatibility issue. The craft-platforms#227 issue provides relevant context that Ubuntu 26.04 official GitHub-hosted runners may not yet be available, which could explain the failures.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":37.5,"staleness":35,"complexity":25,"confidence":65},"age_days":24,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-08-19T15:57:03+00:00","updated_at":"2026-09-02T00:28:19+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":35,"complexity":25,"support_request":null,"confidence":65,"impact":50,"quick_win":37.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":45395,"project_name":"craft-archives","source":"github","external_id":"254","title":"refactor: make pydantic models more idiomatic","author":"cmatsuoka","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-archives/pull/254","summary":"Refactors pydantic models to be more idiomatic. All CI checks passing. No reviewers assigned or comments yet.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue this PR addresses (#118) was filed 817 days ago, and its summary explicitly states that the pydantic 2 upgrade (#103) and follow-up commits (e.g., #122) have already addressed the core concerns. This PR is therefore redundant with work already merged into the codebase.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":13.0,"staleness":30,"complexity":35,"confidence":75},"age_days":14,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-08-30T02:23:33+00:00","updated_at":"2026-08-31T12:42:19+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":30,"complexity":35,"support_request":null,"confidence":75,"impact":20,"quick_win":13.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":39023,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"1211","title":"Reconsider the Pebble binary location","author":"cjdcordeiro","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/1211","summary":"Issue about Pebble binary location conflict with Ubuntu packages. Resolved by merged PRs #528 and #552 which relocated pebble to .rock/bin/ then back to /usr/bin for Ubuntu 24.04+ rocks.","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"This issue was resolved through merged PRs #528 (which relocated pebble to .rock/bin/ to avoid conflicts) and #552 (which updated the path to /usr/bin for Ubuntu 24.04+ rocks). The concern about Pebble binary location conflicts has been addressed by the maintainers.","scores":{"impact":70,"quick_win":42.0,"staleness":30,"complexity":40,"confidence":85,"support_request":10},"age_days":113,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-05-22T13:04:09+00:00","updated_at":"2026-05-22T13:04:09+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":30,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":85,"impact":70,"quick_win":42.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":43194,"project_name":"imagecraft","source":"github","external_id":"416","title":"feat(grub): install BIOS GRUB without loop devices or chroot","author":"lengau","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/imagecraft/pull/416","summary":"Part 6 of a stack refactoring GRUB BIOS/MBR installation to work without root privileges, removing chroot and loop device dependencies. Under review with 3 unresolved comments.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"The PR has 3 unresolved review comments and a pending review status with 0 comments. Last activity was 5 days ago, indicating it's still active. This is a significant architectural change (28 files, +3616/-354 lines) that removes chroot/loop device dependencies for rootless GRUB installation, requiring careful maintainer review.","scores":{"impact":70,"quick_win":17.5,"staleness":30,"complexity":75,"confidence":65},"age_days":31,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-08-13T08:29:58+00:00","updated_at":"2026-08-31T21:44:52+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":30,"complexity":75,"support_request":null,"confidence":65,"impact":70,"quick_win":17.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":44596,"project_name":"craft-platforms","source":"github","external_id":"264","title":"build(deps): lock file maintenance (main)","author":"renovate","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-platforms/pull/264","summary":"Renovate-generated lock file maintenance PR with 2 approvals and 0 unresolved comments. Most CI checks pass, though 2 lint checks are failing.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"The PR has received 2 approvals and 0 unresolved review comments, indicating it's ready for maintainer review and potential merge. The failing lint checks appear to be minor and may be pre-existing or acceptable for lock file maintenance.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":14.25,"staleness":30,"complexity":5,"confidence":85},"age_days":20,"labels":["PR: Dependencies"],"created_at":"2026-08-24T00:05:52+00:00","updated_at":"2026-09-09T13:46:32+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":30,"complexity":5,"support_request":null,"confidence":85,"impact":15,"quick_win":14.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":28331,"project_name":"snapcraft (launchpad)","source":"launchpad","external_id":"1695242","title":"You can close a channel that hasn't been opened","author":"~elopio","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1695242","summary":"snapcraft close reports 'channel is now closed' even when the channel was never opened or already closed, which is inaccurate. Open since 2017, no comments, but recently active (17 days ago) and labelled store/ui by a maintainer.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is a genuine, well-reproduced bug in the store close command's output, and it shows recent activity (17 days ago) with store/ui labels applied by a maintainer, indicating it has been triaged and is still considered relevant. No evidence of a fix or duplicate, and inactivity is not the issue here given the recent touch.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":21.0,"staleness":25,"complexity":30,"confidence":55,"support_request":10},"age_days":3389,"labels":["store","ui"],"created_at":"2017-06-02T10:11:37.662415+00:00","updated_at":"2026-08-14T15:39:24.361287+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":25,"complexity":30,"support_request":10,"confidence":55,"impact":30,"quick_win":21.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":1644,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2494","title":"charmcraft pack wont produce a proper charm","author":"erik78se","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/2494","summary":"charmcraft init machine profile produced 22.04 base and ignored pyproject.toml deps (uv.lock needed). Base bumped to 24.04 in #2522; init output now explains uv lock in #2754. Docs/template improvements still open.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainers actively engaged (lengau confirmed 22.04 was forgotten, dwilding opened PR #2506). Base bump landed in #2522 and init output improved in #2754, but the reporter's request for better template docs/links and tests is not fully addressed, so the issue remains valid and open.","scores":{"impact":55,"quick_win":38.5,"staleness":25,"complexity":30,"confidence":75,"support_request":40},"age_days":287,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-11-30T09:27:02+00:00","updated_at":"2025-12-08T21:29:16+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":25,"complexity":30,"support_request":40,"confidence":75,"impact":55,"quick_win":38.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":45312,"project_name":"craft-providers","source":"github","external_id":"1011","title":"chore: reduce verbosity of timer logging","author":"cmatsuoka","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-providers/pull/1011","summary":"Reduces timer logging verbosity and increases update interval from 3s to 30s in craft-providers. Has 3 unresolved review comments and one failing CI check.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"The PR has 3 unresolved review comments and one failing CI check (test-basic / Slow tests on ubuntu-24.04) that need attention. It's a small, low-risk logging change addressing issue #450, but requires maintainer review to address the review comments and investigate the failing CI before merging.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":17.0,"staleness":25,"complexity":15,"confidence":60},"age_days":14,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-08-29T13:09:28+00:00","updated_at":"2026-09-01T16:55:33+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":25,"complexity":15,"support_request":null,"confidence":60,"impact":20,"quick_win":17.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":6074,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"5817","title":"Unclear remote build error with ``--build-for`` on core20","author":"bepri","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/5817","summary":"core20 remote-build with --build-for and long-form architectures emits a misleading --build-on error. Triaged by maintainers as a likely legacy limitation; addressed in 8.14.4 via PR #6090 which improved the error message.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is triaged (Status: Triaged, Type: Bug) and was actively scoped by @mr-cal with a concrete plan (test across versions, document limitation, add warning). The 8.14.4 release notes list #5817 as fixed and PR #6090 improved the error, but the underlying limitation (legacy remote builder not supporting --build-for with long-form architectures) may still exist, so the issue should remain open until maintainers confirm the scope of work is complete.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":22.0,"staleness":25,"complexity":45,"confidence":85,"support_request":10},"age_days":338,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Bug"],"created_at":"2025-10-09T21:15:52+00:00","updated_at":"2026-03-13T17:39:19+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":25,"complexity":45,"support_request":10,"confidence":85,"impact":40,"quick_win":22.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":39083,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"6297","title":"Task: kde-neon-6 core26 support","author":"ScarlettGatelyMoore","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/6297","summary":"Enhancement task to add core26 support for kde-neon-6 Qt extension. Triaged and assigned to ScarlettGatelyMoore, who is actively working on related content snaps.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is triaged (Status: Triaged label), assigned to ScarlettGatelyMoore, and has recent maintainer engagement (mr-cal assigned it on 2026-07-02). The author confirmed they are 'Working on content snaps', indicating active development. This is a valid enhancement task requiring ongoing work.","scores":{"impact":60,"quick_win":21.0,"staleness":25,"complexity":65,"confidence":75,"support_request":10},"age_days":86,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2026-06-18T14:57:17+00:00","updated_at":"2026-07-02T20:52:26+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":25,"complexity":65,"support_request":10,"confidence":75,"impact":60,"quick_win":21.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":1639,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2499","title":"Remove charmhub config from charmcraft.yaml spec","author":"Copilot","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/pull/2499","summary":"Copilot-agent PR removing the deprecated charmhub key from the charmcraft.yaml spec (validator allowing it only on ubuntu@24.04/almalinux@9 bases, schema removal, deprecation warning). Rebased onto main 60 days ago; 0 reviewers, 7 unresolved comments, several CI checks failing.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"The PR was actively rebased onto main 60 days ago (commit f01fc4d per Copilot's 2026-07-02 reply to @lengau's rebase request) and the target issue #1787 is still open, so it is not stale and not superseded. However it has 0 reviewers, 7 unresolved review comments, and failing CI (snap-tests on ubuntu-25.10/26.04, snap-store-tests, OSV-scanner, Conventional Commits title check, lint/files), so it needs a maintainer review before landing.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":25,"complexity":55,"confidence":70},"age_days":283,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-12-03T18:31:11+00:00","updated_at":"2026-07-02T18:51:15+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":25,"complexity":55,"support_request":null,"confidence":70,"impact":40,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":42798,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1660","title":"Python plugin fails on core26: base snap does not include Python interpreter","author":"agherzan","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/1660","summary":"Python plugin fails on core26 base due to missing Python interpreter; maintainers suggest implementing clearer error guidance","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainers @bepri and @jahn-junior have acknowledged the issue and explicitly suggested implementing a clearer warning message when users don't include python3-venv in stage-packages. The issue is valid, scoped, and has maintainer buy-in. No craft-parts commits address this yet (git_log_search returned no matches for 'core26 python').","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"staleness":25,"complexity":40,"confidence":75,"support_request":20},"age_days":33,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-08-10T17:42:35+00:00","updated_at":"2026-08-11T18:58:32+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":25,"complexity":40,"support_request":20,"confidence":75,"impact":50,"quick_win":30.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":45234,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"1169","title":"ci: run snap spread tests in one job per system","author":"lengau","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/pull/1169","summary":"Splits snap-tests CI workflow into one job per system using spread.yaml matrix. 0 reviewers, 7 unresolved review comments, zizmor CI failing.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"The PR has 7 unresolved review comments and a failing zizmor CI check that need addressing before merge. It's a small CI workflow change (+19/-5 lines, 1 file) that improves test parallelism but requires maintainer review to resolve the security audit failure and review comments.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":32.0,"staleness":25,"complexity":20,"confidence":70},"age_days":15,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-08-28T18:40:19+00:00","updated_at":"2026-08-28T18:43:12+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":25,"complexity":20,"support_request":null,"confidence":70,"impact":40,"quick_win":32.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":45921,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"6412","title":"edit-validation-sets refuses to create a new validation set at sequence 1 (\"sequence number was not incremented\")","author":"bugraaydogar","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/6412","summary":"edit-validation-sets rejects creating new validation sets at sequence 1 due to incorrect sequence-increment validation. Triaged and confirmed by maintainer.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is triaged (Status: Triaged label), confirmed by maintainer @mr-cal who stated 'Snapcraft shouldn't use the sequence-incrementing code for new validation sets', and has a clear reproduction path. The bug is in _validate_assertion in snapcraft/services/validationsets.py which compares the edited sequence against the CLI argument even when no validation set exists yet.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":35.0,"staleness":25,"complexity":30,"confidence":80,"support_request":0},"age_days":9,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Bug"],"created_at":"2026-09-03T15:16:24+00:00","updated_at":"2026-09-08T16:37:24+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":25,"complexity":30,"support_request":0,"confidence":80,"impact":50,"quick_win":35.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":6764,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"5115","title":"component does not take snap version when no version provided","author":"stephensp","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/5115","summary":"Component version not inherited from snap when no explicit version is set. Triaged as enhancement; fix planned via component-level adopt-info support, scheduled for 25.10 cycle. Component adopt-info now appears in docs and code.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is triaged (Status: Triaged, Type: Enhancement) and a maintainer (mr-cal) confirmed on 2025-04-25 that the fix strategy is to rely on adopt-info for components, scheduled for the 25.10 cycle. The codebase now shows component-level adopt_info in the Component model (project.py:1818) and docs describe it, suggesting the feature may already be partially or fully implemented — worth verifying before closing.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":22.5,"staleness":25,"complexity":55,"confidence":72,"support_request":5},"age_days":699,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2024-10-14T00:50:52+00:00","updated_at":"2025-04-25T20:09:36+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":25,"complexity":55,"support_request":5,"confidence":72,"impact":50,"quick_win":22.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":39407,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1603","title":"docs: for the autotools plugin relevant flags are not described, e.g. disable_parallel","author":"xypron","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/1603","summary":"Documentation missing for autotools plugin's disable_parallel option. PR #1631 opened to address this, currently under review with unresolved comments.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"PR #1631 is actively addressing this documentation gap and is currently under review with two unresolved comments from a reviewer. The issue has maintainer acknowledgment (lengau transferred it to craft-parts) and a contributor has opened a fix. Keeping it open allows the PR to be completed.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":38.25,"staleness":25,"complexity":15,"confidence":85,"support_request":10},"age_days":107,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Documentation","Type: Bug"],"created_at":"2026-05-28T16:19:19+00:00","updated_at":"2026-07-07T21:14:10+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":25,"complexity":15,"support_request":10,"confidence":85,"impact":45,"quick_win":38.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":44438,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1682","title":"feat(package/apt): validate all stage packages","author":"cmatsuoka","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/pull/1682","summary":"Validates all stage packages instead of failing on the first invalid entry. Has 3 approvals but unresolved merge conflicts and failing lint check.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"The PR has 3 approvals but unresolved merge conflicts (requested by @lengau on 2026-09-02) and a failing lint check. Once conflicts are resolved and lint passes, it should be ready to merge as it addresses issue #196 with a meaningful UX improvement.","scores":{"impact":55,"quick_win":33.0,"staleness":25,"complexity":40,"confidence":75},"age_days":22,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-08-22T02:01:37+00:00","updated_at":"2026-09-02T14:32:35+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":25,"complexity":40,"support_request":null,"confidence":75,"impact":55,"quick_win":33.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":21619,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1470","title":"Integration test for poetry plugin requires root/apt state (not marked, fails locally)","author":"gcomneno","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/1470","summary":"Poetry plugin integration tests fail for unprivileged users because they apt-install build deps (findutils, python3-poetry, etc.). Reporter re-verified on current main that all 16 cases fail and offered a one-line fix adding the existing requires_root marker. No maintainer response yet.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"No labels, no maintainer comments, and no assignee — the sole comment is the reporter's own re-verification on current main (dbc2a503) showing all 16 cases still raise BuildPackagesNotInstalled unprivileged, with an offer to submit a one-line fix. The fix is trivial and matches existing conventions (conftest.py already skips requires_root tests when euid != 0, and CI has a sudo-based test-requires-root job), so it just needs a maintainer to acknowledge and accept the contribution.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":25,"complexity":10,"confidence":85,"support_request":35},"age_days":202,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-02-22T19:52:39+00:00","updated_at":"2026-08-18T09:17:56+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":25,"complexity":10,"support_request":35,"confidence":85,"impact":20,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":2815,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"1313","title":"Make it easier to release charms in CI and in general","author":"sed-i","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/1313","summary":"Feature request to upload and release a charm plus its OCI resources in one command without tracking integer revision IDs. Skopeo integration landed, but upload --resource still requires name:revision format. Maintainers acknowledge it remains applicable and UX is being considered across crafts.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer @carlcsaposs-canonical (2025-09-23) explicitly confirmed 'I think this is still applicable' and @lengau (2025-10-08) noted the UX needs cross-craft coordination with snapcraft, indicating active triage and buy-in. Code inspection confirms upload --resource still requires <name>:<revision> integer format (ResourceOption in utils/cli.py), so the core request remains unimplemented despite skopeo integration.","scores":{"impact":55,"quick_win":16.5,"staleness":25,"complexity":70,"confidence":75,"support_request":0},"age_days":1073,"labels":[],"created_at":"2023-10-05T18:36:00+00:00","updated_at":"2025-10-08T14:50:50+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":25,"complexity":70,"support_request":0,"confidence":75,"impact":55,"quick_win":16.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":4670,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"1005","title":"rockcraft needs to update apt sources before installing build-packages","author":"vpa1977","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/1005","summary":"Rockcraft fails to install build-packages (e.g. openjdk-25-jdk-headless) because craft-parts marks packages before refreshing the apt cache. Maintainers triaged it as an upstream craft-parts bug; fix merged in craft-parts#1468, now awaiting dependency bump/release.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainers actively triaged this (gcomneno, 2026-02-22 and 2026-03-31) and identified the root cause as upstream craft-parts: Ubuntu.install_packages() marked packages before apt-get update, causing BuildPackageNotFound on stale caches. The fix was merged in canonical/craft-parts#1468 (commit c2836c97), and rockcraft already depends on craft-parts>=2.35.0, so the issue should stay open until the fixed craft-parts release is confirmed in a rockcraft release and the reporter verifies.","scores":{"impact":55,"quick_win":38.5,"staleness":25,"complexity":30,"confidence":80,"support_request":5},"age_days":334,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-10-13T19:21:50+00:00","updated_at":"2026-03-31T14:47:47+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":25,"complexity":30,"support_request":5,"confidence":80,"impact":55,"quick_win":38.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":5654,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"20","title":"Add support for `craftctl get version`","author":"jnsgruk","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/20","summary":"Request to expose project version via craftctl get version (or env var) in override-* scriptlets. Recent triage notes CRAFT_PROJECT_VERSION env var already covers the use case; gap may be documentation. Awaiting maintainer confirmation on whether craftctl get version is still wanted.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The reporter followed up on 2026-03-18 asking maintainers to confirm whether craftctl get version is still aligned with intended design, and tagged @tigarmo and @asanvaq for visibility. A prior triage comment (2026-02-26) noted CRAFT_PROJECT_VERSION already exists in tests but may be undocumented, suggesting the actionable gap is documentation. The issue is active (last activity 166 days ago) and awaiting maintainer response, so it should remain open.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":28.0,"staleness":25,"complexity":30,"confidence":70,"support_request":15},"age_days":1619,"labels":[],"created_at":"2022-04-07T18:57:52+00:00","updated_at":"2026-03-18T16:59:23+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":25,"complexity":30,"support_request":15,"confidence":70,"impact":40,"quick_win":28.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":4167,"project_name":"imagecraft","source":"github","external_id":"300","title":"Race condition when mounting loop devices","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/imagecraft/issues/300","summary":"Race condition where loop partition devices (/dev/loopXpN) don't exist yet when mount is called after losetup --partscan. Triaged, maintainer suggested flock on parent device. Partial fix (wait for nodes) added in services/image.py via PR #428, but same failure still hit in pack path CI (19 days ago).","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Issue is triaged and acknowledged by maintainer mwhudson who confirmed the race and suggested flock on the parent device. A partial fix (_wait_for_partition_nodes) was added in services/image.py (PR #428), but the pack/image.py path still lacks any wait, and the same class of failure was hit 19 days ago on PR #402 (non-sequential-partitions test). The issue remains reproducible and unfixed in the pack code path.","scores":{"impact":55,"quick_win":19.25,"staleness":25,"complexity":65,"confidence":72,"support_request":5},"age_days":173,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Bug"],"created_at":"2026-03-23T15:46:04+00:00","updated_at":"2026-08-12T22:26:18+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":25,"complexity":65,"support_request":5,"confidence":72,"impact":55,"quick_win":19.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":40577,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1631","title":"docs: document autotools disable-parallel key","author":"GreyViperTooth","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/pull/1631","summary":"Documentation PR adding disable-parallel key docs for autotools plugin. Approved by 1 reviewer but has 2 unresolved comments and failing CI checks.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"The PR has 1 approval but 2 unresolved review comments and failing CI checks (test-common / Minimum dependencies, test-java-plugins / Slow tests). The author responded to @lengau's nudge and @bepri's feedback but hasn't yet addressed the unresolved comments. Maintainer review is needed to resolve remaining feedback and CI issues before merging.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":17.0,"staleness":25,"complexity":15,"confidence":75},"age_days":67,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-07-07T21:10:20+00:00","updated_at":"2026-09-10T16:44:12+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":25,"complexity":15,"support_request":null,"confidence":75,"impact":20,"quick_win":17.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":21637,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1452","title":"feat: Add `UV_LINK_MODE=copy`","author":"carlcsaposs-canonical","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/pull/1452","summary":"Adds UV_LINK_MODE=copy to avoid hardlinking warnings when cache dir is mounted from LXD host. Approved by 4 reviewers with recent activity; 1 unresolved review comment and some failing CI tests remain.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"The PR has 4 approvals and recent activity (author rebased and addressed the changelog/docs request on 2026-02-18), but there is 1 unresolved review comment and several failing CI tests (test-common / Slow tests on ubuntu-22.04, noble/s390x, noble/ppc64el) that need to be addressed before merging.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":38.25,"staleness":25,"complexity":15,"confidence":80},"age_days":215,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-02-09T11:24:19+00:00","updated_at":"2026-09-02T15:01:09+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":25,"complexity":15,"support_request":null,"confidence":80,"impact":45,"quick_win":38.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":12466,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"607","title":"feat: allow use of interceptable `mknod` in `ProviderService`","author":"mattculler","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/pull/607","summary":"Small PR (+15/-4, 3 files) to pass craft-providers' new intercept_mknod argument through ProviderService's LXDProvider call. Open 593 days, last activity 2 days ago. Review status: changes_requested with 2 unresolved comments. CI passing.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"The PR has changes_requested from 2 reviewers with 2 unresolved comments, so the author needs to address that feedback before it can proceed. The upstream dependency (craft-providers#717) is already merged and the current provider.py still lacks the intercept_mknod parameter, confirming the change is still needed. Recent activity (2 days ago) and all-passing CI indicate the PR is live and actionable.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":29.75,"staleness":25,"complexity":15,"confidence":78},"age_days":605,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-01-15T18:24:48+00:00","updated_at":"2026-08-29T21:58:55+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":25,"complexity":15,"support_request":null,"confidence":78,"impact":35,"quick_win":29.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":40451,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"6324","title":"validation-sets sorts integer sequence alphabetically","author":"joulsen","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/6324","summary":"Validation sets command sorts sequence numbers alphabetically instead of numerically. A fix was submitted in PR #6339 but closed due to CLA issues, leaving the bug unfixed.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is a valid bug confirmed by @wanacode who referenced PR #6339 as a fix. The PR was closed due to CLA issues, not technical problems, so the bug remains unfixed. The sorting logic in snapcraft/services/validationsets.py and snapcraft/store/client.py shows no numeric sort is applied, confirming the issue persists.","scores":{"impact":55,"quick_win":46.75,"staleness":25,"complexity":15,"confidence":75,"support_request":5},"age_days":68,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-07-06T13:47:56+00:00","updated_at":"2026-07-13T18:26:03+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":25,"complexity":15,"support_request":5,"confidence":75,"impact":55,"quick_win":46.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":22084,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1001","title":"npm plugin fails in the presence of `base-files`","author":"tigarmo","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/1001","summary":"npm plugin (and any part creating bin/lib dirs) conflicts with base-files' bin/lib symlinks at staging, breaking rockcraft pack. Triaged (internal ticket); prototype fix #1004 unmerged; maintainer re-asked reporter 10 days ago if still reproducible, awaiting reply.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is triaged (internal ticket CRAFT-4071 created, bepri provided a broader nil-plugin reproduction) and a maintainer (cmatsuoka) re-engaged 10 days ago asking @tigarmo whether it is still a problem and how it was addressed, so it is actively under discussion and awaiting the reporter's reply (well under 6 months). The prototype fix craft-parts#1004 was closed unmerged and I found no fix in the npm plugin or executor, so there is no evidence it is resolved.","scores":{"impact":55,"quick_win":13.75,"staleness":25,"complexity":75,"confidence":75,"support_request":5},"age_days":589,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-01-31T13:31:44+00:00","updated_at":"2026-09-12T01:45:56+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":25,"complexity":75,"support_request":5,"confidence":75,"impact":55,"quick_win":13.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":4783,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"892","title":"organize with `app: app/app` is not working correctly","author":"javierdelapuente","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/892","summary":"fastapi-framework extension generates organize mapping 'app: app/app' when app code is in an app/ directory, causing FileNotFoundError during pack. Still present in current code; related craft-parts#1460 is open. Recently acknowledged by contributor wanting to work on it.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The bug is still reproducible in current code: _get_install_app_part() in fastapi.py still generates {app: app/app} when _find_asgi_location() returns app/main.py (parts[0]='app' → prime entry 'app/app' → relpath 'app'). Contributor gcomneno commented 166 days ago wanting to take it. Related craft-parts#1460 (organize directory into subdirectory of itself) is still open, so the fix may depend on upstream or require the extension to avoid generating self-nested organize mappings.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":22.5,"staleness":25,"complexity":55,"confidence":75,"support_request":5},"age_days":470,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-05-30T15:54:36+00:00","updated_at":"2026-03-18T17:15:13+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":25,"complexity":55,"support_request":5,"confidence":75,"impact":50,"quick_win":22.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":11852,"project_name":"debcraft","source":"github","external_id":"147","title":"[Feature] Add support for conffiles","author":"hector-cao","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/debcraft/issues/147","summary":"Feature request to add support for Debian conffiles (config files) in debcraft package metadata. Partial support added in PR #156 (installdebconf helper); more PRs to follow per maintainer comment.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer @cmatsuoka confirmed partial support was added in PR #156 (installdebconf helper) with more PRs to follow, indicating active work on this feature. The issue is a legitimate feature request with clear scope and ongoing development.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":25.0,"staleness":25,"complexity":50,"confidence":70,"support_request":0},"age_days":138,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-04-27T14:25:48+00:00","updated_at":"2026-05-22T16:30:59+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":25,"complexity":50,"support_request":0,"confidence":70,"impact":50,"quick_win":25.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":2313,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"1816","title":"Reactive charm built with charmcraft 3.x is missing options from the included layers and is broken","author":"lgp171188","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/1816","summary":"Reactive charms built with charmcraft 3.x lose config.yaml options from included layers; 2.x works. Maintainer acknowledged and plans a rewrite of the reactive build logic; reporter confirmed still broken on 3.4.3 and is willing to wait.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer @lengau explicitly acknowledged on 2025-05-22 and plans to 'fully redo this logic' to support new features, and the reporter confirmed the bug persists on 3.4.3 with concrete build links. The issue is triaged, valid, and actively being addressed via a planned rewrite, so it should remain open.","scores":{"impact":60,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":25,"complexity":70,"confidence":80,"support_request":10},"age_days":759,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-08-15T08:09:17+00:00","updated_at":"2025-08-15T15:18:12+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":25,"complexity":70,"support_request":10,"confidence":80,"impact":60,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":39833,"project_name":"craft-providers","source":"github","external_id":"900","title":"feat(base): cache uv directory","author":"carlcsaposs-canonical","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-providers/pull/900","summary":"Adds uv cache directory caching to craft-providers base, approved by 1 reviewer with 0 unresolved comments. CI mostly passing, some slow tests pending.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"PR is approved with 0 unresolved review comments and CI mostly passing. @astrojuanlu asked about blockers on 2026-03-30, and @lengau noted a new opt-in cache-sharing approach is in development. The PR addresses charmcraft#2461 with a straightforward +43/-22 line change and should be reviewed for merge or to determine if the new cache approach supersedes it.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":28.0,"staleness":25,"complexity":20,"confidence":75},"age_days":218,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-02-06T14:14:36+00:00","updated_at":"2026-08-29T13:33:46+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":25,"complexity":20,"support_request":null,"confidence":75,"impact":35,"quick_win":28.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":12080,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"994","title":"feat: retry upon ChunkedEncodingError","author":"zhijie-yang","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/pull/994","summary":"Adds retry logic for ChunkedEncodingError in fetch-service requests to resolve #993 (retry on broken connections). Approved by 1 reviewer but has 3 unresolved review comments; snap-tests (openstack) CI check failing.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"The PR is approved but has 3 unresolved review comments that need to be addressed before merging. Last activity was 32 days ago, which is within the 3-month window. The failing snap-tests (openstack) CI check also needs attention. The feature addresses a real reliability issue (#993) for fetch-service connections.","scores":{"impact":55,"quick_win":30.25,"staleness":25,"complexity":45,"confidence":70},"age_days":230,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-01-25T19:13:08+00:00","updated_at":"2026-07-30T09:50:42+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":25,"complexity":45,"support_request":null,"confidence":70,"impact":55,"quick_win":30.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":43260,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"6384","title":"remote-build: set snapcraft's channel in the build recipe","author":"mr-cal","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/6384","summary":"Enhancement to set Snapcraft's channel in remote build recipes and expose an environment variable for channel selection. Triaged, from maintainer, 23 days old.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is already triaged (Status: Triaged label), authored by a maintainer (mr-cal), and addresses a real problem with version pinning for remote builds — specifically ensuring core20 snap builds remain functional after Snapcraft 9 release. The related issues (snapcraft#3600, snapcraft#2938) suggest similar channel-handling work is being considered, but this issue's specific request for an environment variable and explicit channel setting in the build recipe warrants keeping it open for tracking.","scores":{"impact":70,"quick_win":28.0,"staleness":20,"complexity":60,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":30,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2026-08-13T16:31:32+00:00","updated_at":"2026-08-13T16:33:09+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":20,"complexity":60,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":70,"quick_win":28.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":7172,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"4706","title":"Install build snaps from the host if available","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/4706","summary":"Feature request to inject host-installed build snaps into the build container to speed up development and avoid re-downloading large SDK snaps. Active: a maintainer recently proposed using craft-application's enqueue_snap_injection.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Despite its age, the issue has fresh activity: @steinbro (2026-06-12) reported hitting the same problem on craft-sdk, and @mr-cal (2026-06-22) proposed a concrete fix via craft-application's enqueue_snap_injection, which I verified exists in provider.py. It is a valid, scoped feature request with a technical path forward, so it should stay open.","scores":{"impact":55,"quick_win":22.0,"staleness":20,"complexity":60,"confidence":80,"support_request":10},"age_days":897,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-03-29T23:40:07+00:00","updated_at":"2026-06-22T18:55:12+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":20,"complexity":60,"support_request":10,"confidence":80,"impact":55,"quick_win":22.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":39244,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"1243","title":"improve error message","author":"beliaev-maksim","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/1243","summary":"User requests better error messages for chisel digest mismatches. The error is currently raw and confusing. This is a valid UX improvement request for a known issue in craft-parts/rockcraft.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is a valid feature request to improve error message clarity for chisel failures (digest mismatches). The error handling logic exists in craft-parts (ChiselError), and while it extracts the raw error, it doesn't provide user-friendly guidance. It should remain open for a maintainer to decide if/when to implement better parsing or documentation.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":28.0,"staleness":20,"complexity":30,"confidence":85,"support_request":10},"age_days":100,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-06-05T09:47:41+00:00","updated_at":"2026-06-05T09:47:41+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":20,"complexity":30,"support_request":10,"confidence":85,"impact":40,"quick_win":28.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":45579,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1704","title":"Add Python v2 package quoting regression test","author":"copilot-swe-agent","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/pull/1704","summary":"Adds a unit test for Python plugin v2 package quoting regression. No reviewer engagement yet; related issue #1702 is closed.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"The PR adds a regression test for Python plugin v2 package quoting (related to closed issue #1702). It has no reviewer engagement yet and the related issue is already closed, creating ambiguity about whether this test is needed or if the fix was already applied elsewhere. A maintainer should review to determine if this test provides valuable regression coverage or if it's redundant with existing tests like `test_get_build_commands_quotes_package_arguments`.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":27.0,"staleness":20,"complexity":10,"confidence":60},"age_days":12,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-08-31T15:18:20+00:00","updated_at":"2026-08-31T15:27:17+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":20,"complexity":10,"support_request":null,"confidence":60,"impact":30,"quick_win":27.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":43969,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"1336","title":"Scheduled/manual Spread snap build fails when generated version exceeds 32 characters","author":"gcomneno","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/1336","summary":"Snap-build fails when setuptools_scm post-release version exceeds 32 chars. Acknowledged by maintainer, confirmed with fresh reproduction.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer @lengau acknowledged the issue ('We were aware of the length limit...but not that we were running up against it') and the reporter confirmed with a fresh reproduction on 2026-09-06. The issue is clearly scoped with a valid bug (snap-build fails when version exceeds 32 chars) and has recent activity.","scores":{"impact":55,"quick_win":30.25,"staleness":20,"complexity":45,"confidence":75,"support_request":10},"age_days":25,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-08-19T04:28:58+00:00","updated_at":"2026-09-06T06:56:52+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":20,"complexity":45,"support_request":10,"confidence":75,"impact":55,"quick_win":30.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":21721,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1364","title":"File source handler ignores changes to the file","author":"dmitry-lyfar","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/1364","summary":"craft-parts file source handler (source-type: file) does not detect changes to the source file, so re-pulling after editing the file keeps stale content. Triaged/confirmed bug; a maintainer requested assignment on 2026-03-23 to investigate change detection.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is labelled Status: Triaged and Type: Bug, was confirmed by @lengau ('simply running touch on the file should cause the pull step to run again... but that doesn't happen'), re-reported by @jpm-canonical on 2026-03-16, and @gcomneno asked to be assigned on 2026-03-23 to investigate. Code confirms FileSourceHandler.pull() copies the file but the base check_if_outdated() raises SourceUpdateUnsupported, so change detection is genuinely unimplemented for file sources. Actively being worked on, so it should stay open.","scores":{"impact":60,"quick_win":27.0,"staleness":20,"complexity":55,"confidence":75,"support_request":5},"age_days":334,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Bug"],"created_at":"2025-10-13T23:01:03+00:00","updated_at":"2026-03-23T20:38:38+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":20,"complexity":55,"support_request":5,"confidence":75,"impact":60,"quick_win":27.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":39849,"project_name":"craft-providers","source":"github","external_id":"829","title":"Warmup is not resilient to snapd restarting","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-providers/issues/829","summary":"Warmup fails when snapd restarts because 'snap watch' errors with 'daemon is stopping'. Issue is triaged, valid, and likely fixed by retry logic in PR #899 (commit e0f6bc7).","suggested_action":"close_stale","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is likely fixed by PR #899 (commit e0f6bc7), which added retry logic to the 'snap watch' command to handle transient snapd restarts. The code now uses retry_until_timeout to handle the 'daemon is stopping' error, making the warmup resilient to snapd restarts.","scores":{"impact":60,"quick_win":42.0,"staleness":20,"complexity":30,"confidence":85,"support_request":0},"age_days":361,"labels":["Type: Bug","Status: Triaged"],"created_at":"2025-09-16T20:35:47+00:00","updated_at":"2025-09-16T20:35:56+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":20,"complexity":30,"support_request":0,"confidence":85,"impact":60,"quick_win":42.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":12015,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"1059","title":"Packing with CRAFT_BUILD_ON can fail when installing registered snaps","author":"tigarmo","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/issues/1059","summary":"Cross-architecture packing with CRAFT_BUILD_ON fails when a plugin registers a snap: the provider injects the host's base snap (e.g. core24) into the guest, which fails on arch mismatch. Triaged; fixed in craft-application PR #1037.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is triaged (Status: Triaged label, internal ticket CRAFT-5118) and the root cause is addressed by craft-application PR #1037 ('don't inject snaps if the host and guest architectures differ'), which skips host snap injection when build_on differs from the host arch. The issue should be closed once the fix is verified, but it is not stale or invalid.","scores":{"impact":60,"quick_win":33.0,"staleness":20,"complexity":45,"confidence":80,"support_request":5},"age_days":155,"labels":["Status: Triaged"],"created_at":"2026-04-10T17:28:42+00:00","updated_at":"2026-04-10T17:29:05+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":20,"complexity":45,"support_request":5,"confidence":80,"impact":60,"quick_win":33.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":1919,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2213","title":"Change templates to link to current documentation","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/2213","summary":"Charmcraft templates should link charmcraft.yaml to modern docs instead of outdated juju.is pages. No comments or labels; recent template commits show active maintenance, so it needs triage.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is unlabelled with zero comments, but the templates directory has active recent commits (e.g. #2753 updating URLs in profiles, #2733), so it is not stale. It is a small, well-scoped doc-link cleanup rather than a support request.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":25.5,"staleness":20,"complexity":15,"confidence":75,"support_request":5},"age_days":555,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-03-06T18:50:23+00:00","updated_at":"2026-07-15T20:23:11+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":20,"complexity":15,"support_request":5,"confidence":75,"impact":30,"quick_win":25.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":4862,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"813","title":"`rockcraft pack` with go-framework fails with `FileNotFoundError`","author":"Aflynn50","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/813","summary":"rockcraft pack with go-framework extension fails with FileNotFoundError at staging when project has go.mod but no Go source files. Maintainer confirmed root cause (2026-02-26) and opened a PR to validate .go file presence and fail early; fix not yet merged.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer @gcomneno actively engaged on 2026-02-26, confirming the root cause (go.mod present but no Go source files causes the go plugin to produce no output, leading to the FileNotFoundError during staging) and stating they opened a PR to add early validation with a clearer error. The issue is triaged, valid, and has an in-flight fix, so it should remain open until the PR lands. The original reporter's repro also skipped the tutorial step of creating main.go, so the underlying UX gap (confusing low-level error) is real.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":36.0,"staleness":15,"complexity":20,"confidence":75,"support_request":10},"age_days":577,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-02-12T18:38:17+00:00","updated_at":"2026-02-26T17:32:47+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":15,"complexity":20,"support_request":10,"confidence":75,"impact":45,"quick_win":36.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":1569,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2573","title":"Support referencing sibling directories of project root","author":"steinbro","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/2573","summary":"Feature request to build charms from a monorepo by mounting the whole git repo (sibling dirs like shared-lib) instead of only the charmcraft.yaml dir. Triaged, actively discussed; an experimental git-driven build root (CHARMCRAFT_EXPERIMENTAL_MONOREPO) has since landed.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Labelled Status: Triaged and actively discussed (6 comments, last activity 86 days ago) with multiple maintainers and users (Valkey, Sunbeam's 80-charm monorepo, Cargo workspaces) expressing strong need. A related experimental implementation (CHARMCRAFT_EXPERIMENTAL_MONOREPO, PR #2836) has landed in the codebase, but it is opt-in/experimental and not the finalized top-level project-root design discussed in-thread, so the issue remains a valid open feature request.","scores":{"impact":80,"quick_win":24.0,"staleness":15,"complexity":70,"confidence":75,"support_request":10},"age_days":213,"labels":["Status: Triaged"],"created_at":"2026-02-12T02:31:33+00:00","updated_at":"2026-06-03T20:57:14+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":15,"complexity":70,"support_request":10,"confidence":75,"impact":80,"quick_win":24.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":46124,"project_name":"craft-providers","source":"github","external_id":"1014","title":"build(deps): update actions/setup-node action to v7 (main)","author":"renovate","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-providers/pull/1014","summary":"Automated dependency update from actions/setup-node v6 to v7, with passing CI and automerge enabled.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"This is a routine Renovate-generated dependency update (+1/-1 lines) with all CI checks passing and automerge enabled. It requires a maintainer review to approve the v7 upgrade before it can be merged.","scores":{"impact":5,"quick_win":4.75,"staleness":15,"complexity":5,"confidence":85},"age_days":7,"labels":["PR: Dependencies"],"created_at":"2026-09-05T11:36:04+00:00","updated_at":"2026-09-12T01:19:51+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":15,"complexity":5,"support_request":null,"confidence":85,"impact":5,"quick_win":4.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":6120,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"5770","title":"docs: dump plugin docs don't provide enough information to even get started","author":"artiepoole","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/5770","summary":"Documentation for dump plugin lacks examples and key descriptions. Maintainer acknowledged; PR craft-parts#1597 adding examples is actively in review (updated 4 days ago).","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"This is a valid documentation improvement request with active maintainer engagement (medubelko responded) and concrete work in progress: PR craft-parts#1597 is adding usage examples and was updated 4 days ago with unresolved review comments. The issue remains relevant as confirmed by WyvernIXTL's recent comment.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":40.0,"staleness":15,"complexity":20,"confidence":85,"support_request":10},"age_days":366,"labels":["Type: Documentation"],"created_at":"2025-09-11T16:42:52+00:00","updated_at":"2026-09-01T11:10:35+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":15,"complexity":20,"support_request":10,"confidence":85,"impact":50,"quick_win":40.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":21549,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1540","title":"docs: reduce instances of 'v2' in plugin references","author":"medubelko","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/pull/1540","summary":"Documentation cleanup removing 'v2' from plugin references across 2 files (+6/-6 lines). Approved by 2 reviewers with 1 unresolved comment; CI passing.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"The PR has 2 approvals and passing CI, but has 1 unresolved review comment that needs attention before merge. Recent activity (4 days ago) and maintainer authorship suggest it's close to completion.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":15,"complexity":10,"confidence":80},"age_days":156,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-04-09T19:07:23+00:00","updated_at":"2026-09-01T13:19:12+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":15,"complexity":10,"support_request":null,"confidence":80,"impact":20,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":21642,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1447","title":"snap build fails if go must download the version","author":"adombeck","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/1447","summary":"Go plugin env validation in craft-parts fails when `go version` triggers a toolchain auto-download, because validator._execute returns stderr ('go: downloading go1.25.6...') instead of stdout. Bug confirmed present in current code; a contributor requested assignment 8 days ago.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The bug is confirmed still present: validator.py's _execute() (line ~152) returns `proc.stderr if proc.stderr else proc.stdout`, so when Go auto-downloads a toolchain the 'go: downloading...' stderr line is misread as the version and GoPluginEnvironmentValidator raises 'invalid go compiler version'. A contributor (gcomneno) requested assignment 8 days ago, indicating active interest. The fix is small (use stdout for the version check, or tolerate the download message), but no maintainer has yet triaged or labelled it.","scores":{"impact":55,"quick_win":41.25,"staleness":15,"complexity":25,"confidence":80,"support_request":5},"age_days":219,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-02-05T12:54:37+00:00","updated_at":"2026-08-23T17:29:47+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":15,"complexity":25,"support_request":5,"confidence":80,"impact":55,"quick_win":41.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":45218,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"1351","title":"Changing from basefull to baseless silently produces an incomplete rock","author":"lczyk","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/1351","summary":"Switching from basefull to baseless without cleaning silently produces incomplete rocks missing 520 files from the previous base","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"This is a well-documented bug with clear reproduction steps showing stale state reuse when changing bases without cleaning, but it has no maintainer response, labels, or assignee after 8 days. The issue requires triage to confirm the bug and prioritize a fix for this silent data loss.","scores":{"impact":75,"quick_win":33.75,"staleness":15,"complexity":55,"confidence":75,"support_request":10},"age_days":15,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-08-28T17:05:10+00:00","updated_at":"2026-08-28T17:10:48+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":15,"complexity":55,"support_request":10,"confidence":75,"impact":75,"quick_win":33.75,"has_related_links":false},{"id":45878,"project_name":"craft-actions","source":"github","external_id":"108","title":"feat: imagecraft/pack","author":"bepri","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-actions/pull/108","summary":"Adds Node-based pack action for Imagecraft. Under review with 3 unresolved comments. CI failures expected until Imagecraft 1.0 is tagged.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"PR is fresh (9 days old) with 2 reviewers requesting changes and 3 unresolved review comments. The PR body acknowledges CI failures are expected until Imagecraft 1.0 is tagged, so failing CI is not a blocker. Maintainer needs to review the unresolved comments and provide feedback.","scores":{"impact":70,"quick_win":24.5,"staleness":15,"complexity":65,"confidence":75},"age_days":10,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-09-02T19:04:48+00:00","updated_at":"2026-09-11T18:38:21+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":15,"complexity":65,"support_request":null,"confidence":75,"impact":70,"quick_win":24.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":12274,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"800","title":"Test must only pack if necessary","author":"cmatsuoka","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/issues/800","summary":"Enhancement: make `snapcraft test` skip repacking the artifact when unnecessary, using packed-file state. Triaged; PR #1111 added conditional repacking (ST160 metadata mediator) and a maintainer is still discussing scope (e.g. a `--use-artifact` option) in recent comments.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Labelled Status: Triaged with active maintainer discussion 40 days ago (astrojuanlu questioning whether ST1111/ST160 allows a `--use-artifact` mechanism), and PR #1111 (merged, 'feat: add conditional repacking support', fixes #1097) is explicitly cited as making progress. The changelog confirms the metadata mediator API landed in 7.1.0, but the test command's behavior and the requested CLI option remain unresolved, so it should stay open.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":22.5,"staleness":15,"complexity":55,"confidence":75,"support_request":10},"age_days":435,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2025-07-04T17:11:18+00:00","updated_at":"2026-07-22T07:04:30+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":15,"complexity":55,"support_request":10,"confidence":75,"impact":50,"quick_win":22.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":44761,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1692","title":"fix: refresh build snaps if already installed","author":"cmatsuoka","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/pull/1692","summary":"Refreshes build snaps when already installed to reflect channel changes, fixing #496. Has 2 approvals, 1 unresolved review comment, and mostly passing CI.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"PR has 2 approvals and addresses issue #496 where build-snaps channel changes are ignored without a clean. One unresolved review comment requires maintainer attention before merge. CI passes except for flaky test failures.","scores":{"impact":55,"quick_win":33.0,"staleness":15,"complexity":40,"confidence":75},"age_days":18,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-08-25T17:14:36+00:00","updated_at":"2026-09-02T14:27:49+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":15,"complexity":40,"support_request":null,"confidence":75,"impact":55,"quick_win":33.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":21505,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1584","title":"feat: Add agent skill to create new plugins","author":"steinbro","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/pull/1584","summary":"Adds an agent skill (2387 lines, 27 files) to scaffold new build-system plugins for craft-parts. Maintainer-authored, last active 11 days ago, 7 unresolved review comments, lint/files CI failing, no human discussion yet.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"The PR has 7 unresolved review comments and a failing lint/files CI check with zero human discussion (0 comments). As a maintainer-authored feature adding 2387 lines across 27 files to the .github/skills/ directory, it needs a reviewer to address the outstanding comments and fix the lint failure before it can be merged.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":19.25,"staleness":15,"complexity":45,"confidence":72},"age_days":122,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-05-13T12:50:11+00:00","updated_at":"2026-08-20T23:38:34+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":15,"complexity":45,"support_request":null,"confidence":72,"impact":35,"quick_win":19.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":40217,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"1280","title":"Docs: Tutorials assume an `amd64` host which causes `platforms:` and `.rock` filenames break for `arm64` readers","author":"minulo","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/1280","summary":"Documentation tutorials hardcode amd64 in platforms and .rock filenames, breaking for arm64 users. Issue assigned to contributor who is actively working on a fix.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue was assigned by maintainer @asanvaq on 2026-07-06, and the author @minulo provided a scope update on 2026-07-07 confirming work is in progress on a PR covering Hello World, Pack a Python package, and Node.js app tutorials. This is an active, triaged documentation fix being worked on.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":34.0,"staleness":15,"complexity":15,"confidence":85,"support_request":0},"age_days":72,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-07-02T15:49:55+00:00","updated_at":"2026-07-07T23:24:09+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":15,"complexity":15,"support_request":0,"confidence":85,"impact":40,"quick_win":34.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":45556,"project_name":"imagecraft","source":"github","external_id":"431","title":"[QUESTION] Cache directory?","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/imagecraft/issues/431","summary":"Maintainer asks about mounting /var/cache in overlay to prevent cached files from being included in images and requests suggestions for caching improvements.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"This is a design question from a maintainer about caching strategy with no labels, no assignee, and no maintainer discussion yet. The issue is fresh (5 days old) and asks for input on architectural decisions around overlay caching, so it needs triage to determine if it should become a feature request, discussion, or be addressed differently.","scores":{"impact":55,"quick_win":33.0,"staleness":15,"complexity":40,"confidence":75,"support_request":10},"age_days":12,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-08-31T13:22:47+00:00","updated_at":"2026-08-31T13:23:08+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":15,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":75,"impact":55,"quick_win":33.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":40456,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"1120","title":"Handle multi-artifact generation in testing","author":"cmatsuoka","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/issues/1120","summary":"Enhancement to update test infrastructure for multi-artifact generation. Already implemented by merged PR #1167.","suggested_action":"close_not_a_bug","suggested_action_reason":"This enhancement has already been implemented and merged in PR #1167 (canonical/craft-application#1167), which adds CRAFT_ARTIFACT_<name> variables to the spread test environment for multi-artifact projects like Debcraft. The issue is effectively a duplicate of that merged PR.","scores":{"impact":60,"quick_win":42.0,"staleness":15,"complexity":30,"confidence":85,"support_request":0},"age_days":68,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2026-07-06T14:59:00+00:00","updated_at":"2026-07-14T18:43:23+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":15,"complexity":30,"support_request":0,"confidence":85,"impact":60,"quick_win":42.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":40746,"project_name":"craft-actions","source":"github","external_id":"74","title":"Default to `latest/stable` for LXD","author":"bepri","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-actions/issues/74","summary":"Issue to change LXD channel default from `5.21/stable` to `latest/stable`, later refined to omit `--channel` entirely for system default. Triaged and under maintainer discussion.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is triaged (Status: Triaged label), has active maintainer discussion (bepri updated the approach on 2026-09-11), and the scope is clear: stop hardcoding an LXD channel and let the system default apply. The recent comment indicates the team is actively refining the solution, so it should remain open for implementation.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":35.0,"staleness":15,"complexity":30,"confidence":75,"support_request":10},"age_days":64,"labels":["Status: Triaged"],"created_at":"2026-07-10T19:21:45+00:00","updated_at":"2026-09-11T18:41:13+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":15,"complexity":30,"support_request":10,"confidence":75,"impact":50,"quick_win":35.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":42390,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"1314","title":"expose bundled `umoci` as `rockcraft.umoci`","author":"lczyk","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/1314","summary":"Enhancement to expose bundled umoci as rockcraft.umoci snap app; contributor ready to implement but waiting for maintainer decision on pre-1.0 API stability concern.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has active maintainer discussion (lengau raised a valid pre-1.0 API stability concern on 2026-08-18) and a contributor (@gcomneno) is waiting for direction from @tigarmo before implementing. Recent activity (5 days ago) and clear scope make it worth keeping open pending a maintainer decision.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":32.0,"staleness":15,"complexity":20,"confidence":75,"support_request":10},"age_days":44,"labels":["Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2026-07-30T11:14:16+00:00","updated_at":"2026-08-31T13:18:12+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":15,"complexity":20,"support_request":10,"confidence":75,"impact":40,"quick_win":32.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":45309,"project_name":"craft-providers","source":"github","external_id":"1010","title":"fix: improve robustness of compatibility tag","author":"cmatsuoka","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-providers/pull/1010","summary":"PR improves compatibility tag handling by not assuming compatibility when tag is missing, refactors instance config loading into shared method with consistent error handling. Fresh PR (7 days old), passing CI, awaiting review.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"This is a fresh PR (7 days old) with passing CI checks that addresses issue #789 (open ~1 year without maintainer action). It has 0 reviewers and 0 comments, so it needs maintainer review. The change refactors instance config loading and improves compatibility tag error handling, which is a reasonable improvement.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":19.25,"staleness":15,"complexity":45,"confidence":65},"age_days":14,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-08-29T12:34:00+00:00","updated_at":"2026-08-29T14:16:44+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":15,"complexity":45,"support_request":null,"confidence":65,"impact":35,"quick_win":19.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":45196,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1697","title":"ci: collect s390x JVM crash information and compiler replay data","author":"lengau","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/pull/1697","summary":"Draft PR adding a QA job to collect s390x JVM crash logs and compiler replay data for Launchpad bug reporting. Has 6 unresolved review comments and 0 reviewers.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"This is a draft PR with 6 unresolved review comments and 0 reviewers, indicating it's still under active review. The PR adds CI infrastructure for s390x JVM crash data collection, which is a legitimate improvement. Recent activity (8 days ago) suggests it's still being worked on.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":26.0,"staleness":15,"complexity":35,"confidence":75},"age_days":15,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-08-28T15:18:03+00:00","updated_at":"2026-08-28T17:48:30+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":15,"complexity":35,"support_request":null,"confidence":75,"impact":40,"quick_win":26.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":44639,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"6401","title":"`snapcraft metrics` CLI requires `--name` but does not list the possible values","author":"bepri","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/6401","summary":"snapcraft metrics CLI --name argument doesn't display available metric choices in help text. Issue is triaged but has no maintainer comments after 12 days.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is triaged (has 'Status: Triaged' label) and describes a legitimate usability gap: the --name argument has choices defined in code (MetricName enum) but they aren't surfaced in help text. The issue is fresh (12 days old) and should remain open for a maintainer to address.","scores":{"impact":55,"quick_win":41.25,"staleness":15,"complexity":25,"confidence":75,"support_request":35},"age_days":19,"labels":["Status: Triaged"],"created_at":"2026-08-24T13:00:45+00:00","updated_at":"2026-08-24T13:00:45+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":15,"complexity":25,"support_request":35,"confidence":75,"impact":55,"quick_win":41.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":21535,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1554","title":"BuildPackageNotFound for valid packages when snap uses core24 on Ubuntu 26.04 (libapt ABI mismatch)","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/1554","summary":"BuildPackageNotFound for valid packages when a core24 snap runs on Ubuntu 26.04 (apt ABI mismatch). Actively under discussion: a reproducer branch exists, and a maintainer (mr-cal) is challenging the ABI root-cause theory, noting the error also reproduces on 24.04 without apt-get update.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is actively being worked: a maintainer created a reproducer branch (work/repro/1554-core24-buildpackagenotfound) with regression tests, and mr-cal's 2026-07-07 comment is challenging the root-cause analysis with a new reproducer that works on both 24.04 and 26.04, suggesting the real cause may be a stale apt cache rather than the libapt ABI mismatch. This is a genuine bug (30+ consecutive CI failures on ubuntu-26.04 spread tests) that needs further investigation, not closure.","scores":{"impact":60,"quick_win":15.0,"staleness":15,"complexity":75,"confidence":70,"support_request":5},"age_days":144,"labels":["Type: Bug"],"created_at":"2026-04-22T05:06:19+00:00","updated_at":"2026-07-07T16:36:40+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":15,"complexity":75,"support_request":5,"confidence":70,"impact":60,"quick_win":15.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":45235,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"1170","title":"test(spread): wait out in-progress auto-refresh in prepare","author":"lengau","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/pull/1170","summary":"Fixes spread prepare step race condition with snapd auto-refresh by holding refreshes and waiting for in-progress operations. Approved, CI passing.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"PR is approved by 1 reviewer with 0 unresolved comments and all CI checks passing. The fix addresses a real intermittent test failure (snap auto-refresh race condition) by following Charmcraft's established approach. Ready for maintainer merge.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":29.75,"staleness":15,"complexity":15,"confidence":85},"age_days":15,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-08-28T18:49:16+00:00","updated_at":"2026-09-04T17:12:35+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":15,"complexity":15,"support_request":null,"confidence":85,"impact":35,"quick_win":29.75,"has_related_links":false},{"id":1512,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2631","title":"Multiple `charmcraft pack` fail on mismatching platforms","author":"simondeziel","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/2631","summary":"Charmcraft 4.2.0+ reuses a managed LXD instance from a prior `charmcraft pack` of a different project, causing the second pack to fail with 'Platform not found in the project definition' when platform sets differ. Still reproducible on 4.3.1 per reporter's 2026-08-17 comment; no maintainer response or labels yet.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no assignee, and no maintainer comments — only the reporter's own follow-up (2026-08-17) confirming it persists on 4.3.1. It's a clear regression (worked in 4.0.1, broke in 4.2.0) with a concrete reproducer (two consecutive `charmcraft pack` calls with different platform sets), so it needs maintainer triage rather than closure. Complexity is moderate because the root cause likely lies in craft-providers' instance/base-instance reuse logic (the 'Creating instance from base instance' step) rather than charmcraft's own code, which I could not locate in this repo's source.","scores":{"impact":65,"quick_win":26.0,"staleness":15,"complexity":60,"confidence":70,"support_request":5},"age_days":163,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-04-02T15:23:55+00:00","updated_at":"2026-08-17T21:21:39+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":15,"complexity":60,"support_request":5,"confidence":70,"impact":65,"quick_win":26.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":40572,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"1289","title":"docs: make tutorials architecture-agnostic","author":"minulo","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/pull/1289","summary":"Makes tutorials architecture-agnostic by replacing hardcoded amd64 with dynamic dpkg-based detection. Approved, CI passing, reviewer comments addressed.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"The PR has been approved by a reviewer (asanvaq) with all CI checks passing and zero unresolved comments. The author addressed all review feedback on July 16, 2026, and the documentation-only change is ready for maintainer merge. It fixes open issue rockcraft#1280.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":34.0,"staleness":10,"complexity":15,"confidence":85},"age_days":67,"labels":["documentation"],"created_at":"2026-07-07T23:25:35+00:00","updated_at":"2026-09-11T23:32:53+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":10,"complexity":15,"support_request":null,"confidence":85,"impact":40,"quick_win":34.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":44337,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"1343","title":"bug/question: should `_daemon_` be set with `*` password field?","author":"cjdcordeiro","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/1343","summary":"Discussion about whether _daemon_ user's /etc/passwd password field should be * instead of x to avoid shadow file lookup in containers.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is clearly scoped as a design decision about the _daemon_ user's password field and has active maintainer discussion (@cmatsuoka commented 3 days ago supporting *). It requires a deliberate choice between x and * for /etc/passwd entries, so it should remain open for resolution.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":25.5,"staleness":10,"complexity":15,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":22,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-08-21T15:46:58+00:00","updated_at":"2026-09-02T16:34:51+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":10,"complexity":15,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":30,"quick_win":25.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":45153,"project_name":"debcraft","source":"github","external_id":"187","title":"Set `Application.allow_spread_yaml` to false","author":"mr-cal","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/debcraft/issues/187","summary":"Triaged task to set Application.allow_spread_yaml to false and update craft-application dependency to >=7.3.0 in debcraft.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is triaged and clearly scoped as a maintainer task to disable legacy spread.yaml parsing by setting Application.allow_spread_yaml = false and updating the craft-application dependency. It requires a straightforward code change in debcraft/application.py.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":40.0,"staleness":10,"complexity":20,"confidence":90,"support_request":0},"age_days":15,"labels":["Status: Triaged"],"created_at":"2026-08-28T12:43:06+00:00","updated_at":"2026-08-28T18:10:55+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":10,"complexity":20,"support_request":0,"confidence":90,"impact":50,"quick_win":40.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":22474,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"610","title":"Utility function to format partition names","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/610","summary":"Refactor request to extract partition-name-to-env-var translation (uppercase, +/-/ to _) into a shared utility, currently duplicated in executor/environment.py and utils/partition_utils.py. Contributor volunteered 17 days ago with a concrete plan; duplication confirmed to still exist.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"A contributor (@gcomneno) commented 17 days ago taking the issue on, verified the duplication still exists in both _translate_partition_env() and _detect_conflicts(), and proposed a behavior-preserving refactor with unit coverage. I confirmed via source inspection that both code paths still independently apply the same translation, so the issue is valid, scoped, and actively being worked on.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":22.5,"staleness":10,"complexity":25,"confidence":90,"support_request":0},"age_days":1004,"labels":[],"created_at":"2023-12-13T16:47:14+00:00","updated_at":"2026-08-14T13:19:04+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":10,"complexity":25,"support_request":0,"confidence":90,"impact":30,"quick_win":22.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":45398,"project_name":"craft-cli","source":"github","external_id":"481","title":"feat: error early when help message is missing","author":"cmatsuoka","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-cli/pull/481","summary":"Raises a command configuration error when help text is missing instead of crashing with an IndexError. Passing CI, awaiting review.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"This is a fresh PR (7 days old) with passing CI but zero reviewers and no comments. It addresses issue #242 by guarding against unhelpful IndexError crashes when command arguments lack help text. The change is small (+52/-50 lines, 2 files) and focused, so it needs maintainer review to proceed.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":42.5,"staleness":10,"complexity":15,"confidence":75},"age_days":14,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-08-30T02:43:41+00:00","updated_at":"2026-08-31T15:22:39+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":10,"complexity":15,"support_request":null,"confidence":75,"impact":50,"quick_win":42.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":44670,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2849","title":"Refactor: Split up plugin tests","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/2849","summary":"Refactor to split large plugin test files (test_reactive.py, test_python.py) into smaller focused files. Triaged, with maintainer encouraging contributors to take it.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is triaged (Status: Triaged label), has maintainer engagement (lengau responded on 2026-08-25 encouraging hawkxdev to take it), and has active contributor interest (two volunteers expressed intent to work on it). It's a well-scoped pure refactor with no behavior changes, appropriate as a good first issue.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":25.5,"staleness":10,"complexity":15,"confidence":85,"support_request":0},"age_days":19,"labels":["good first issue","Status: Triaged"],"created_at":"2026-08-24T15:23:28+00:00","updated_at":"2026-08-27T12:57:26+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":10,"complexity":15,"support_request":0,"confidence":85,"impact":30,"quick_win":25.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":22671,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"413","title":"Updating repositories does not trigger necessary actions","author":"gboutry","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/413","summary":"Rockcraft: removing a PPA from package-repositories does not remove its sources file or retrigger the pull step. Triaged by maintainer with a concrete plan split across craft-parts (generic project-option tracking in step state) and craft-application (opt package_repositories into tracking). Unfixed; active discussion 8 days ago.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer cmatsuoka actively triaged this 8 days ago, assigning ownership to craft-parts (generic project-option tracking in step state) and craft-application (opting package_repositories into that tracking, plus optional overlay cleanup). The ProjectOptions class in craft_parts/infos.py still lacks package_repositories, and PullState.project_options_of_interest only tracks project_vars, confirming the fix is not yet implemented. The issue is valid, scoped, and under active discussion.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":22.5,"staleness":10,"complexity":55,"confidence":80,"support_request":5},"age_days":1258,"labels":[],"created_at":"2023-04-03T13:17:16+00:00","updated_at":"2026-08-24T01:14:11+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":10,"complexity":55,"support_request":5,"confidence":80,"impact":50,"quick_win":22.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":45946,"project_name":"imagecraft","source":"github","external_id":"434","title":"feat(grub): loop-device-free EFI GRUB setup","author":"lengau","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/imagecraft/pull/434","summary":"Part of a GRUB refactoring stack implementing loop-device-free EFI GRUB setup. Fresh PR with 7 unresolved review comments and no maintainer engagement yet.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"This is a fresh PR (2 days old) that is part of a larger GRUB refactoring stack (related to imagecraft#416 and imagecraft#417). It has 7 unresolved review comments indicating it is under active review, but has received no maintainer engagement yet. The PR touches 12 files with +1561/-145 lines, suggesting a non-trivial architectural change that warrants maintainer attention.","scores":{"impact":55,"quick_win":19.25,"staleness":10,"complexity":65,"confidence":75},"age_days":9,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-09-03T17:51:44+00:00","updated_at":"2026-09-04T13:58:28+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":10,"complexity":65,"support_request":null,"confidence":75,"impact":55,"quick_win":19.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":47200,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2877","title":"feat: implement metadata mediation for manifest.yaml","author":"cmatsuoka","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/pull/2877","summary":"Implements metadata mediation for manifest.yaml using craft-application packaging API. Has 2 approvals but 3 unresolved review comments and some failing CI tests.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"The PR has 2 reviewer approvals but 3 unresolved review comments and 2 failing CI checks (snap-store-tests, snap-tests on ubuntu-25.10 and 20.04). Maintainer review is needed to address the unresolved comments and CI failures before merging.","scores":{"impact":55,"quick_win":30.25,"staleness":10,"complexity":45,"confidence":75},"age_days":2,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-09-10T21:10:05+00:00","updated_at":"2026-09-11T20:48:36+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":10,"complexity":45,"support_request":null,"confidence":75,"impact":55,"quick_win":30.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":45943,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2869","title":"chore: mark extension-provided endpoints as optional","author":"wctaylor","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/pull/2869","summary":"Marks observability and ingress endpoints as optional in extensions, addressing issue #2868. Fresh PR with 0 reviews and some CI failures on older Ubuntu releases.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"This PR is 2 days old with no maintainer review (0 reviewers, 0 comments) and addresses open issue #2868. While the change is straightforward (marking endpoints as optional), the PR has 3 failing CI jobs on ubuntu-22.04-64, ubuntu-25.10-64, and ubuntu-20.04-64 that should be investigated before merging.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":35.0,"staleness":10,"complexity":30,"confidence":65},"age_days":9,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-09-03T17:27:43+00:00","updated_at":"2026-09-07T14:33:23+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":10,"complexity":30,"support_request":null,"confidence":65,"impact":50,"quick_win":35.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":5825,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"6095","title":"Allow staging snap components","author":"cnihelton","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/6095","summary":"Enhancement to extend stage-snaps to stage snap components (snap+component syntax) for composing ROCKs/composite snaps. Triaged and acknowledged; upstream work in craft-parts#1604 is a draft on hold pending component access/management design.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is labelled Status: Triaged and maintainer @mr-cal has engaged across three comments, most recently (2026-08-25, 6 days ago) confirming upstream work exists in craft-parts#1604 and explaining it is on hold pending how components should be accessed and managed. The reporter also supplied a concrete rockcraft.yaml reproducer (gemma3 components), so the request is well-scoped and valid; it should stay open while the blocked upstream design work is resolved.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":10,"complexity":60,"confidence":85,"support_request":5},"age_days":184,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2026-03-12T15:26:14+00:00","updated_at":"2026-08-25T16:31:53+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":10,"complexity":60,"support_request":5,"confidence":85,"impact":45,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":46467,"project_name":"fetch-service","source":"github","external_id":"645","title":"fix: support application-credential auth in keystone-v3 secret","author":"simonepelosi","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/fetch-service/pull/645","summary":"Adds application_credential auth support to keystone-v3 secret injection, fixing silent failures when this auth method is used. PR is 4 days old with no reviewer engagement yet; CI passes unit tests but fails linters and OSV-scanner.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"This is a fresh PR (4 days old) addressing a real bug where application_credential auth requests silently fail because injectKeystoneV3Secret returns an error that's only debug-logged. The PR has no reviewer engagement yet and CI shows linter/OSV-scanner failures that need addressing. Maintainer review is needed to validate the implementation approach and ensure the linter issues are resolved.","scores":{"impact":55,"quick_win":30.25,"staleness":10,"complexity":45,"confidence":70},"age_days":5,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-09-07T16:16:02+00:00","updated_at":"2026-09-12T13:54:05+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":10,"complexity":45,"support_request":null,"confidence":70,"impact":55,"quick_win":30.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":45712,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"1354","title":"CODA: unify all CLI command references in one page","author":"asanvaq","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/issues/1354","summary":"Documentation task to consolidate Rockcraft CLI command references into a single page. Assigned to @0xzoowa, marked as duplicate of canonical/open-documentation-academy#376.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is fresh (9 days old), has been assigned to @0xzoowa with a mentor (@asanvaq), and is part of Canonical's Open Documentation Academy program. While marked as a duplicate of canonical/open-documentation-academy#376, it remains actively tracked and assigned, indicating it should stay open for the contributor to work on.","scores":{"impact":55,"quick_win":35.75,"staleness":10,"complexity":35,"confidence":70,"support_request":0},"age_days":11,"labels":["coda"],"created_at":"2026-09-01T14:17:55+00:00","updated_at":"2026-09-11T14:05:34+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":10,"complexity":35,"support_request":0,"confidence":70,"impact":55,"quick_win":35.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":43860,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"1332","title":"feat(extensions): add writable app data for v2 frameworks","author":"alithethird","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/pull/1332","summary":"Adds writable /app-data directory to v2 12-factor framework extensions. 0 reviewers, most CI passing, source-spread-tests failing. Author requests merge.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"The PR has 0 reviewers and the author (@alithethird) has requested merge. Most CI checks pass but source-spread-tests is failing, which needs investigation before merge. The feature adds a useful /app-data directory across 6 v2 extensions with 205 passing unit tests.","scores":{"impact":60,"quick_win":30.0,"staleness":10,"complexity":50,"confidence":70},"age_days":25,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-08-18T12:39:22+00:00","updated_at":"2026-09-11T05:52:24+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":10,"complexity":50,"support_request":null,"confidence":70,"impact":60,"quick_win":30.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":39431,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1597","title":"docs(dump): add usage examples","author":"gcomneno","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/pull/1597","summary":"Adds practical Dump plugin usage examples to documentation. Under review with changes requested and 5 unresolved comments; CI mostly passing.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"The PR has 'changes_requested' status with 5 unresolved review comments. The author recently addressed feedback (2026-09-12) and is waiting for reviewer @cmatsuoka to weigh in. CI is mostly passing. It needs a maintainer to review the changes and provide approval or further feedback.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":29.75,"staleness":10,"complexity":15,"confidence":75},"age_days":113,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-05-23T06:59:48+00:00","updated_at":"2026-09-12T07:06:32+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":10,"complexity":15,"support_request":null,"confidence":75,"impact":35,"quick_win":29.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":46475,"project_name":"fetch-service","source":"github","external_id":"640","title":"fix(deps): update module github.com/gobwas/glob to v1","author":"renovate","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/fetch-service/pull/640","summary":"Automated Renovate PR updating github.com/gobwas/glob from v0.2.3 to v1.0.0. Currently failing CI checks, likely due to API changes in the new major version. Requires maintainer review.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"This is an automated Renovate PR for a major version dependency update that is currently failing CI, likely due to breaking API changes in v1.0.0. Maintainer review is needed to determine if the codebase should be updated to match the new API or if the update should be rejected.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":24.0,"staleness":10,"complexity":20,"confidence":85},"age_days":15,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-08-28T19:30:14+00:00","updated_at":"2026-09-03T11:58:19+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":10,"complexity":20,"support_request":null,"confidence":85,"impact":30,"quick_win":24.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":46473,"project_name":"fetch-service","source":"github","external_id":"641","title":"chore(deps): update dependency canonical-sphinx to v0.7.0","author":"renovate","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/fetch-service/pull/641","summary":"Updates canonical-sphinx dependency from 0.6.0 to 0.7.0. Approved by 1 reviewer but snap-test and OSV-scanner CI checks are failing.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"This is a simple 1-line dependency update approved by 1 reviewer, but snap-test (jammy and noble) and OSV-scanner CI checks are failing. A maintainer should verify whether the CI failures are pre-existing or caused by this change before merging.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":14.25,"staleness":10,"complexity":5,"confidence":75},"age_days":10,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-09-03T02:10:03+00:00","updated_at":"2026-09-03T17:50:04+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":10,"complexity":5,"support_request":null,"confidence":75,"impact":15,"quick_win":14.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":46469,"project_name":"fetch-service","source":"github","external_id":"642","title":"fix(deps): update module github.com/klauspost/compress to v1.20.0","author":"renovate","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/fetch-service/pull/642","summary":"Mend Renovate PR updating github.com/klauspost/compress from v1.19.2 to v1.20.0; CI has one failing check (OSV-scanner), no maintainer comments yet","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The PR is only 6 days old with recent activity (4 days ago), but the OSV-scanner CI check is failing, which requires investigation before merging. The PR should remain open to allow the security scan failure to be addressed or dismissed by maintainers.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":19.0,"staleness":10,"complexity":5,"confidence":60},"age_days":10,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-09-03T02:10:23+00:00","updated_at":"2026-09-05T03:22:52+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":10,"complexity":5,"support_request":null,"confidence":60,"impact":20,"quick_win":19.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":39106,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"6278","title":"feat(extensions): Add core26 support to the gnome extension","author":"aleasto","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/pull/6278","summary":"Adds core26 support to the GNOME extension. Approved by 1 reviewer with 3 unresolved comments. CI has failing spread tests on ubuntu-26.04. Author recently asked if it can be landed.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"The PR has 1 approval but 3 unresolved review comments and failing integration-spread-tests on ubuntu-26.04. The author (@aleasto) asked on 2026-09-07 if anything else is needed to land it, indicating active engagement. Maintainers should address the unresolved comments and investigate the failing spread tests before merging.","scores":{"impact":65,"quick_win":29.25,"staleness":10,"complexity":55,"confidence":75},"age_days":100,"labels":["PR: Run Manual Spread"],"created_at":"2026-06-04T19:13:33+00:00","updated_at":"2026-09-10T13:13:35+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":10,"complexity":55,"support_request":null,"confidence":75,"impact":65,"quick_win":29.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":44953,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2853","title":"test(plugins): split package install command tests","author":"hawkxdev","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/pull/2853","summary":"Splits test_get_package_install_commands into focused unit tests across python, poetry, and uv plugins with a shared conftest fixture. Fresh PR with 0 reviewers and 1 unresolved review comment.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"The PR is fresh (10 days old) and addresses open issue #2849, but has 0 reviewers and 1 unresolved review comment, indicating it needs maintainer attention before merging.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":17.0,"staleness":10,"complexity":15,"confidence":75},"age_days":17,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-08-26T15:50:55+00:00","updated_at":"2026-08-28T05:56:02+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":10,"complexity":15,"support_request":null,"confidence":75,"impact":20,"quick_win":17.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":45232,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"6408","title":"Re-organize spread tests","author":"mr-cal","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/6408","summary":"Enhancement to reorganize spread test directories, deduplicate tests, and remove unnecessary spread tests for faster CI. Triaged by maintainer, 8 days old.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"This is a triaged enhancement from a maintainer (mr-cal) requesting spread test reorganization. The sibling project rockcraft completed a similar reorganization in PR #519 (merged), providing a reference implementation. The issue is fresh (8 days old) and clearly scoped with specific goals: faster CI, less duplication, fewer flaky failures, and better filetree navigation.","scores":{"impact":65,"quick_win":29.25,"staleness":10,"complexity":55,"confidence":75,"support_request":0},"age_days":15,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2026-08-28T18:17:51+00:00","updated_at":"2026-08-28T18:18:03+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":10,"complexity":55,"support_request":0,"confidence":75,"impact":65,"quick_win":29.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":46404,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"1179","title":"feat: craft testing backend for lp-test","author":"cmatsuoka","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/pull/1179","summary":"Adds lp-test backend configuration for running tests on Launchpad. Has 2 approvals but 10 unresolved review comments and 2 failing CI checks (snap-tests, lint/files).","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"The PR has 2 approvals but 10 unresolved review comments that need to be addressed before merging. Additionally, two CI checks are failing (snap-tests and lint/files), requiring the author's attention before the PR can be landed.","scores":{"impact":55,"quick_win":30.25,"staleness":10,"complexity":45,"confidence":70},"age_days":4,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-09-08T19:52:20+00:00","updated_at":"2026-09-11T23:44:55+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":10,"complexity":45,"support_request":null,"confidence":70,"impact":55,"quick_win":30.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":40731,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"6332","title":"`snapcraft lint` produces spurious warnings on core26 projects","author":"astrojuanlu","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/6332","summary":"`snapcraft lint` on core26 projects produces spurious warnings because the lint command hardcodes 'core22' as the build base for the linting instance, causing GLIBC version mismatches.","suggested_action":"close_not_a_bug","suggested_action_reason":"The issue describes a bug where `snapcraft lint` hardcodes 'core22' as the build base, causing spurious warnings on core26 projects. However, PR #6272 ('fix(linters): pass build_base to linters and avoid hardcoded fallback') has already been merged, which addresses this exact hardcoded fallback issue. The issue is effectively resolved by this recent fix.","scores":{"impact":70,"quick_win":42.0,"staleness":10,"complexity":40,"confidence":85,"support_request":0},"age_days":64,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-07-10T14:22:12+00:00","updated_at":"2026-07-10T14:22:12+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":10,"complexity":40,"support_request":0,"confidence":85,"impact":70,"quick_win":42.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":13498,"project_name":"craft-cli","source":"github","external_id":"242","title":"Unhelpful error message when creating help if an argument doesn't have a help text","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-cli/issues/242","summary":"craft-cli raised an unhelpful IndexError when a command argument lacked help text; the crash is now guarded in helptexts.py, and maintainer cmatsuoka is addressing the root cause via open PR #481 (fail early on missing help).","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer cmatsuoka commented 2 days ago that '#481 makes applications fail early in case of missing help messages', and PR craft-cli#481 ('feat: error early when help message is missing') is open and directly targets this. The underlying IndexError is already guarded in _build_item_plain (helptexts.py), so the issue is triaged, valid, and being actively addressed — keep open until #481 merges.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":27.0,"staleness":10,"complexity":40,"confidence":80,"support_request":10},"age_days":933,"labels":[],"created_at":"2024-02-22T22:44:46+00:00","updated_at":"2026-08-30T02:47:05+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":10,"complexity":40,"support_request":10,"confidence":80,"impact":45,"quick_win":27.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":46263,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2873","title":"feat(init): support base-specific profiles","author":"alithethird","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/pull/2873","summary":"Adds base-specific profile support to `charmcraft init` via `--base` flag, enabling Ubuntu 26.04 framework template selection. Approved by 1 reviewer with 0 unresolved comments, but CI has failures on some Ubuntu versions and minimum dependencies.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The PR is fresh (4 days old) and has been approved by 1 reviewer with 0 unresolved comments. However, CI has failures on snap-tests (ubuntu-22.04-64, ubuntu-20.04-64, ubuntu-25.10-64) and minimum dependencies, and reviewer @lengau suggested modifying tests/spread/commands/init-extensions/task.yaml to test the new `--base` functionality. These items need to be addressed before merging.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":20.25,"staleness":10,"complexity":55,"confidence":65},"age_days":6,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-09-07T06:52:57+00:00","updated_at":"2026-09-11T19:51:33+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":10,"complexity":55,"support_request":null,"confidence":65,"impact":45,"quick_win":20.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":21501,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1588","title":"Add Patches Directive","author":"bryanfraschetti","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/pull/1588","summary":"Adds a patches directive applying a list of patch files to the source tree during the pull stage (closes #1587). Approved by 1 reviewer, but 6 unresolved review comments, failing CI, and an open design discussion over the hardcoded -p1 flag.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The PR is in an active review cycle: the author reported TestSequencer failures and asked for opinions (2026-05-20), and maintainer cmatsuoka replied (2026-05-21) that the design must be refined to fix the hardcoded -p1 and suggested override-pull to gather real use cases. With activity 11 days ago and clear, actionable maintainer feedback, the PR is under development rather than stale or unmergeable; it is not ready to land due to unresolved comments and failing CI.","scores":{"impact":45,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":10,"complexity":60,"confidence":80},"age_days":115,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-05-20T12:47:51+00:00","updated_at":"2026-08-20T19:25:26+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":10,"complexity":60,"support_request":null,"confidence":80,"impact":45,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":44878,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2852","title":"chore(profiles): remove MODEL_SETTINGS from all tox.ini templates","author":"dwilding","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/pull/2852","summary":"Removes MODEL_SETTINGS passthrough from 14 tox.ini template files across all init profiles. Approved, all CI passing, ready to merge.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"PR has 1 approval, 0 unresolved review comments, and all CI checks passing. The change is a small, clean removal of unused MODEL_SETTINGS from 14 tox.ini template files (+0/-14 lines). Ready for maintainer merge.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":23.75,"staleness":10,"complexity":5,"confidence":85},"age_days":18,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-08-26T01:14:45+00:00","updated_at":"2026-08-26T01:22:11+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":10,"complexity":5,"support_request":null,"confidence":85,"impact":25,"quick_win":23.75,"has_related_links":false},{"id":45924,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"6413","title":"edit-validation-sets makes it impossible to publish a new revision of an existing sequence (no override)","author":"bugraaydogar","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/6413","summary":"Validation set editing blocks same-sequence revisions; maintainer confirmed bug and identified regression from PR #6050. Triaged, open.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer @mr-cal confirmed this is a bug and identified the regression source (PR #6050), with a prior fix in PR #5545. The issue is triaged with clear reproduction steps and a known fix path (making the sequence warning non-blocking).","scores":{"impact":60,"quick_win":42.0,"staleness":10,"complexity":30,"confidence":85,"support_request":0},"age_days":9,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Bug"],"created_at":"2026-09-03T15:41:56+00:00","updated_at":"2026-09-08T16:26:51+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":10,"complexity":30,"support_request":0,"confidence":85,"impact":60,"quick_win":42.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":22034,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1051","title":"Rename overlay+partition specific env vars","author":"upils","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/1051","summary":"Task to rename partition overlay env vars from $CRAFT_[<namespace>_]<partition>_OVERLAY to $CRAFT_[<namespace>_]<partition>_PART_OVERLAY for consistency with other part-specific vars. Unlabeled, no comments; code still uses the old format.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no comments, and no assignee, showing no sign of being categorized or prioritized, despite being filed by a maintainer (upils) and having recent activity 1 day ago. The rename is a breaking API change (environment.py:265,270 still emit CRAFT_<partition>_OVERLAY, and no _PART_OVERLAY variant exists in the codebase), so it needs triage to decide on deprecation/backward-compatibility strategy before work begins.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":19.25,"staleness":10,"complexity":45,"confidence":75,"support_request":5},"age_days":540,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-03-21T16:13:59+00:00","updated_at":"2026-08-30T22:14:08+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":10,"complexity":45,"support_request":5,"confidence":75,"impact":35,"quick_win":19.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":44947,"project_name":"craft-actions","source":"github","external_id":"99","title":"Pack actions need integration tests for the \"test\" boolean flag.","author":"bepri","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-actions/issues/99","summary":"Task to add integration tests for the 'test' boolean flag in pack actions. Issue is triaged and recently created by a maintainer.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is labeled 'Status: Triaged' and was created 10 days ago by maintainer bepri requesting integration tests for the 'test' boolean flag in pack actions. It is a clear, actionable task to improve test coverage, not a bug or support request. The recent creation date and triaged status indicate it should remain open for implementation.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":26.25,"staleness":10,"complexity":25,"confidence":75,"support_request":0},"age_days":17,"labels":["Status: Triaged"],"created_at":"2026-08-26T14:40:20+00:00","updated_at":"2026-08-26T14:40:41+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":10,"complexity":25,"support_request":0,"confidence":75,"impact":35,"quick_win":26.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":47307,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"1363","title":"build(lint): add tombi TOML formatting support","author":"copilot-swe-agent","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/pull/1363","summary":"Adds tombi TOML formatting support to rockcraft, porting changes from starbase. Has 1 approval with reviewer-requested changes recently addressed. CI passing.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"PR has 1 approval but reviewer lengau requested changes (deviation from starbase, linting fixes) which were just addressed in commits f847537 and 5d5fa44. Needs a final review to confirm the changes satisfy the reviewer before merge.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":22.5,"staleness":5,"complexity":25,"confidence":75},"age_days":1,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-09-11T20:46:59+00:00","updated_at":"2026-09-12T01:27:54+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":5,"complexity":25,"support_request":null,"confidence":75,"impact":30,"quick_win":22.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":45161,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2857","title":"Implement metadata mediation for manifest.yaml","author":"cmatsuoka","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/2857","summary":"Feature request to implement metadata mediation for manifest.yaml, similar to metadata.yaml mediation in #2856. Triaged and created by maintainer 8 days ago.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"This is a triaged feature request created by maintainer cmatsuoka 8 days ago to implement metadata mediation for manifest.yaml, parallel to the metadata.yaml mediation in #2856. It has the 'Status: Triaged' label indicating maintainer acknowledgment, and the work is clearly scoped as a feature implementation rather than a bug or support request.","scores":{"impact":55,"quick_win":24.75,"staleness":5,"complexity":55,"confidence":75,"support_request":0},"age_days":15,"labels":["Status: Triaged"],"created_at":"2026-08-28T13:11:55+00:00","updated_at":"2026-08-28T13:12:13+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":5,"complexity":55,"support_request":0,"confidence":75,"impact":55,"quick_win":24.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":21671,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1416","title":"Add ldflags to the go plugin","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/1416","summary":"Feature request to add an ldflags option to the Go plugin so users can pass linker flags (e.g. version overrides) to go install, similar to goreleaser. Not yet implemented; a contributor volunteered with a concrete plan 17 days ago.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Filed by a maintainer and actively engaged: gcomneno commented 17 days ago offering to implement a `go-ldflags` option passed to the final `go install` invocation, with a plan covering quoting semantics, unit tests, and docs. Code inspection confirms the option does not exist yet (only go-buildtags/go-generate), so the request is still valid and in progress.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":22.5,"staleness":5,"complexity":25,"confidence":85,"support_request":0},"age_days":274,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-12-13T01:17:50+00:00","updated_at":"2026-08-14T13:09:05+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":5,"complexity":25,"support_request":0,"confidence":85,"impact":30,"quick_win":22.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":46465,"project_name":"fetch-service","source":"github","external_id":"646","title":"fix(deps): update module golang.org/x/sys to v0.48.0","author":"renovate","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/fetch-service/pull/646","summary":"Renovate PR updating golang.org/x/sys from v0.47.0 to v0.48.0 and go directive from 1.25.11 to 1.26.0. CI failing on linters, unit-tests, and OSV-scanner.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"Fresh automated dependency update (0 days old) with failing CI checks on linters, unit-tests, and OSV-scanner that require maintainer investigation before merging.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":13.5,"staleness":5,"complexity":10,"confidence":85},"age_days":4,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-09-08T18:25:38+00:00","updated_at":"2026-09-08T18:25:39+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":5,"complexity":10,"support_request":null,"confidence":85,"impact":15,"quick_win":13.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":46456,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2875","title":"Allow custom charm parts with the go_framework extension","author":"trollLemon","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/2875","summary":"Feature request to allow go_framework extension with custom charm parts. Currently blocked by intentional design check in charmcraft/extensions/app.py. Awaiting design team review per @lengau's comment.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has no labels, no assignee, and no formal triage decision. While @lengau acknowledged it and redirected to the design team (@alithethird, @javierdelapuente), the issue lacks categorization. The code in charmcraft/extensions/app.py:199-202 shows this is an intentional design decision (not a bug), and the test test_v2_check_input_rejects_customized_charm_part confirms it. This requires architectural review before any action.","scores":{"impact":65,"quick_win":29.25,"staleness":5,"complexity":55,"confidence":75,"support_request":25},"age_days":3,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-09-09T11:12:12+00:00","updated_at":"2026-09-12T01:12:53+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":5,"complexity":55,"support_request":25,"confidence":75,"impact":65,"quick_win":29.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":46463,"project_name":"fetch-service","source":"github","external_id":"643","title":"fix(deps): update module golang.org/x/crypto to v0.57.0","author":"renovate","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/fetch-service/pull/643","summary":"Dependency update for golang.org/x/crypto v0.55.0 → v0.57.0, plus go directive and related dependencies. CI has some failures.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"This is a routine Renovate-generated dependency update that requires maintainer review. The PR has failing CI checks (unit-tests, linters, OSV-scanner) that need investigation before merging, and no maintainer has engaged with it yet.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":33.25,"staleness":5,"complexity":5,"confidence":70},"age_days":9,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-09-03T11:58:17+00:00","updated_at":"2026-09-09T00:27:37+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":5,"complexity":5,"support_request":null,"confidence":70,"impact":35,"quick_win":33.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":47172,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1718","title":"feat: cut build-slices in the prologue","author":"tigarmo","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/pull/1718","summary":"PR adds build-slice cutting in the prologue phase, collecting and deduplicating slices across parts. Under active review with 2 unresolved comments from @cmatsuoka suggesting state optimization. CI has 4 failing tests.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"PR is very fresh (2 days old) and actively under review with 2 unresolved comments from @cmatsuoka suggesting a state optimization for build-slice caching. The author needs to address these review comments before merge. CI has 4 failing tests that should be investigated.","scores":{"impact":55,"quick_win":19.25,"staleness":5,"complexity":65,"confidence":75},"age_days":2,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-09-10T14:40:53+00:00","updated_at":"2026-09-13T00:57:50+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":5,"complexity":65,"support_request":null,"confidence":75,"impact":55,"quick_win":19.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":45875,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"6410","title":"Bundled patchelf drops PT_NOTE coverage for .note.qt.metadata, making every staged Qt 6 plugin unloadable","author":"desvaters","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/6410","summary":"Bundled patchelf 0.9 breaks Qt 6 plugin loading by moving .note.qt.metadata out of PT_NOTE coverage when setting RPATH. Well-researched bug with reproduction steps, awaiting maintainer triage.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"This is a fresh, well-documented bug report with clear reproduction steps and upstream references (NixOS/patchelf#403, #217), but it has zero maintainer interaction, no labels, and no assignee. The issue requires triage to assess whether updating the vendored patchelf from 0.9 to at least 0.16.0 is feasible given the two local patches (from 2021) that may need rebasing.","scores":{"impact":80,"quick_win":32.0,"staleness":5,"complexity":60,"confidence":70,"support_request":10},"age_days":10,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-09-02T18:22:25+00:00","updated_at":"2026-09-02T18:22:25+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":5,"complexity":60,"support_request":10,"confidence":70,"impact":80,"quick_win":32.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":46471,"project_name":"fetch-service","source":"github","external_id":"644","title":"fix(deps): update module github.com/elazarl/goproxy to v1.9.1","author":"renovate","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/fetch-service/pull/644","summary":"Updates github.com/elazarl/goproxy from v1.9.0 to v1.9.1 via Renovate. Minimal diff (+3/-1, 2 files). CI has some failures (snap-test, unit-tests, OSV-scanner). No reviews yet.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"This is a routine dependency update generated by Renovate with a minimal diff (+3/-1 lines across 2 files). It is fresh (4 days old) and has passing CI checks for sync, cla-check, linters, and snap-build, though snap-test, unit-tests, and OSV-scanner are failing. A maintainer review is needed to assess whether the test failures are related to the dependency change or pre-existing.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":14.25,"staleness":5,"complexity":5,"confidence":85},"age_days":8,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-09-04T17:07:26+00:00","updated_at":"2026-09-04T17:07:27+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":5,"complexity":5,"support_request":null,"confidence":85,"impact":15,"quick_win":14.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":47196,"project_name":"imagecraft","source":"github","external_id":"439","title":"Dynamically set snap grade","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/imagecraft/issues/439","summary":"Request to dynamically configure the snap grade in snapcraft.yaml instead of the hardcoded 'devel' value, enabling candidate channel promotion. Currently triaged and open.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is fresh, triaged, and clearly scoped to replace the hardcoded grade: devel in snap/snapcraft.yaml with a dynamic configuration option. This is a valid feature request to support proper release channel management.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":35.0,"staleness":5,"complexity":30,"confidence":90,"support_request":0},"age_days":2,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Bug"],"created_at":"2026-09-10T20:56:48+00:00","updated_at":"2026-09-10T20:58:45+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":5,"complexity":30,"support_request":0,"confidence":90,"impact":50,"quick_win":35.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":46103,"project_name":"craft-providers","source":"github","external_id":"1013","title":"build(deps): update dependency canonical-sphinx to ~=0.7.0 (main)","author":"renovate","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-providers/pull/1013","summary":"Updates canonical-sphinx dependency from ~=0.6.0 to ~=0.7.0. Generated by Renovate, all CI checks passing, awaiting maintainer review.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"Fresh dependency update PR (3 days old) with all CI checks passing. The change is a straightforward version bump of a documentation Sphinx theme dependency, requiring maintainer review and merge.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":19.0,"staleness":5,"complexity":5,"confidence":85},"age_days":8,"labels":["PR: Dependencies"],"created_at":"2026-09-05T06:48:45+00:00","updated_at":"2026-09-08T09:39:23+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":5,"complexity":5,"support_request":null,"confidence":85,"impact":20,"quick_win":19.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":46273,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1712","title":"feat: fpc plugin","author":"lczyk","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/pull/1712","summary":"Adds a Free Pascal (fpc) plugin to craft-parts. Part of a 2-PR set with #1713. Pending maintainer review with 0 reviewers, 1 unresolved comment, and mostly passing CI.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"This is a brand-new PR (1 day old) adding an fpc plugin with 734 lines across 15 files. It has 0 reviewers and 1 unresolved review comment, so it needs maintainer attention. The author notes the one failing CI test (minimum dependencies) is unrelated and also appears on other PRs.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":27.5,"staleness":5,"complexity":45,"confidence":70},"age_days":5,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-09-07T11:25:05+00:00","updated_at":"2026-09-09T08:52:11+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":5,"complexity":45,"support_request":null,"confidence":70,"impact":50,"quick_win":27.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":46083,"project_name":"rockcraft","source":"github","external_id":"1359","title":"build(deps): update dependency setuptools to v84 (main)","author":"renovate","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/rockcraft/pull/1359","summary":"Automated dependency update from setuptools 83.0.0 to 84.0.0 with all CI checks passing, awaiting maintainer review","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"This is a fresh, automated dependency update (setuptools 83→84) with all CI checks passing. It requires maintainer review before merging, as indicated by the 'Automerge: Disabled by config' setting in the PR body.","scores":{"impact":30,"quick_win":27.0,"staleness":5,"complexity":10,"confidence":85},"age_days":8,"labels":["PR: Dependencies"],"created_at":"2026-09-05T03:54:15+00:00","updated_at":"2026-09-08T00:44:54+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":5,"complexity":10,"support_request":null,"confidence":85,"impact":30,"quick_win":27.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":47338,"project_name":"craft-actions","source":"github","external_id":"113","title":"chore(deps): update pnpm/action-setup action to v6.1.0","author":"renovate","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-actions/pull/113","summary":"Renovate-generated PR updating pnpm/action-setup from v6.0.10 to v6.1.0, passing all CI checks, awaiting maintainer review.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"Fresh dependency update PR (0 days old) with passing CI and minimal diff (+2/-2 lines across 2 files). Follows the pattern of craft-actions#87 (previous v6.0.10 update). Needs maintainer review for approval and merge.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":14.25,"staleness":5,"complexity":5,"confidence":90},"age_days":1,"labels":["PR: Dependencies"],"created_at":"2026-09-12T02:58:54+00:00","updated_at":"2026-09-12T02:58:55+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":5,"complexity":5,"support_request":null,"confidence":90,"impact":15,"quick_win":14.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":45848,"project_name":"imagecraft","source":"github","external_id":"433","title":"feat(pack/grubutil): Add FUSE mount support for containerized GRUB installation","author":"lengau","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/imagecraft/pull/433","summary":"Adds FUSE mount support for containerized GRUB installation, replacing loop device attachment. New PR with failing CI (lint, fast tests) and 14 unresolved review comments.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"This is a fresh PR (3 days old) introducing significant changes (+492 lines) that enable GRUB installation in containers without privileged operations. CI is failing on lint and fast tests, and there are 14 unresolved review comments. The PR builds on previously merged PR #428 which added FUSE utilities. Maintainer review is needed to address CI failures and review comments.","scores":{"impact":70,"quick_win":24.5,"staleness":5,"complexity":65,"confidence":70},"age_days":10,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-09-02T15:13:41+00:00","updated_at":"2026-09-02T16:08:19+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":5,"complexity":65,"support_request":null,"confidence":70,"impact":70,"quick_win":24.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":45721,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2866","title":"docs: Document that resources are bound to channels, not revisions.","author":"marcusboden","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/2866","summary":"Documentation issue requesting clarification that resources are bound to channels, not revisions, with a clear example showing the current behavior.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is 4 days old with 0 maintainer comments or responses. While it's a well-written documentation request with a clear reproduction example showing resources are bound to channels rather than revisions, it has not yet been triaged or prioritized by maintainers.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":32.0,"staleness":5,"complexity":20,"confidence":80,"support_request":10},"age_days":11,"labels":["Type: Documentation"],"created_at":"2026-09-01T14:51:17+00:00","updated_at":"2026-09-01T14:53:59+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":5,"complexity":20,"support_request":10,"confidence":80,"impact":40,"quick_win":32.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":1464,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2682","title":"chore: delete some dead code","author":"bepri","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/pull/2682","summary":"Removes 19 lines of dead code in one file, a follow-up to #2681 (remote-build project name fix). Approved by a maintainer, CI mostly green with a few failing/pending snap tests.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"Maintainer-authored, already approved by one reviewer with zero unresolved comments, and last activity was 1 day ago, so it is fresh and ready to land. The diff is a trivial -19 line dead-code deletion tied to the already-merged #2681 remote-build fix, with only a few non-blocking snap-test CI failures (20.04/25.10) and one pending 22.04 job.","scores":{"impact":5,"quick_win":4.75,"staleness":5,"complexity":5,"confidence":80},"age_days":134,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-05-01T20:43:24+00:00","updated_at":"2026-08-27T12:43:36+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":5,"complexity":5,"support_request":null,"confidence":80,"impact":5,"quick_win":4.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":45216,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2859","title":"Documentation links created by charmcraft are invalid","author":"hk21702","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/2859","summary":"Charmcraft CLI help text generates invalid documentation links using full version numbers (e.g., 4.4.1) instead of stable or major version, causing 404 errors.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"This is a valid bug with clear reproduction steps and a clear root cause in charmcraft/application/main.py line 48 where docs_url uses {version} placeholder that resolves to the full version string. No maintainer has triaged or acknowledged the issue yet (0 comments, no labels). The fix likely involves using 'stable' or the major version instead of the full version string, as other links in the codebase already use 'stable'.","scores":{"impact":60,"quick_win":42.0,"staleness":5,"complexity":30,"confidence":80,"support_request":0},"age_days":15,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-08-28T16:50:05+00:00","updated_at":"2026-08-28T16:50:05+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":5,"complexity":30,"support_request":0,"confidence":80,"impact":60,"quick_win":42.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":45933,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2868","title":"Mark optional endpoints as optional in extensions","author":"wctaylor","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/2868","summary":"Feature request to mark observability endpoints (logging, metrics-endpoint, grafana-dashboard) as optional in charmcraft extension metadata templates. Actively discussed with maintainer buy-in.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue has active maintainer engagement (8 comments in 3 days) and explicit buy-in: tonyandrewmeyer stated 'I'm very +1 on the profiles, including the 12-factor ones, having it explicit.' The fix is straightforward—adding `optional: true` to endpoint definitions in charmcraft/extensions/app.py lines 335-338 and updating corresponding tests.","scores":{"impact":55,"quick_win":46.75,"staleness":5,"complexity":15,"confidence":85,"support_request":10},"age_days":9,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-09-03T16:53:01+00:00","updated_at":"2026-09-07T08:59:17+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":5,"complexity":15,"support_request":10,"confidence":85,"impact":55,"quick_win":46.75,"has_related_links":false},{"id":46108,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2871","title":"docs(build-deps): Update docs tutorial Spread dependencies (non-major) (main)","author":"renovate","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/pull/2871","summary":"Renovate PR updating Django, fastapi, Spring Boot, and psycopg2-binary to latest patch/minor versions. Approved by 2 reviewers, all CI checks passing, automerge disabled by config.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"The PR has 2 approvals, all CI checks passing, and automerge is disabled by config so it requires manual merge. The diff is small (+6/-6 lines across 4 files) updating Django 6.0.6→6.1.1, fastapi 0.139.0→0.141.1, Spring Boot 4.1.0→4.1.1, and psycopg2-binary 2.9.12→2.9.13.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":14.25,"staleness":5,"complexity":5,"confidence":90},"age_days":8,"labels":["PR: Dependencies"],"created_at":"2026-09-05T07:57:13+00:00","updated_at":"2026-09-12T20:49:02+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":5,"complexity":5,"support_request":null,"confidence":90,"impact":15,"quick_win":14.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":42719,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1659","title":"build(deps): lock file maintenance (main)","author":"renovate","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/pull/1659","summary":"Renovate lock file maintenance PR updating dependencies. Approved by 2 reviewers with recent activity, though some CI checks are failing. Linting issues reportedly fixed in PR #1662.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"The PR has 2 approvals and very recent activity (0 days ago), but CI checks show failing lint jobs. The comment from @lengau notes linting issues were fixed in PR #1662, so a maintainer should verify the fixes are reflected here and decide whether to merge or re-run CI.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":5,"complexity":10,"confidence":85},"age_days":34,"labels":["PR: Dependencies"],"created_at":"2026-08-10T03:41:19+00:00","updated_at":"2026-09-08T00:03:35+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":5,"complexity":10,"support_request":null,"confidence":85,"impact":20,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":45773,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1707","title":"Drop extraneous type checks","author":"mr-cal","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/1707","summary":"Maintainer mr-cal requests removing redundant isinstance(data, dict) checks across craft-parts, added before strict type checking was enabled. 12 occurrences found. Issue is 4 days old with no maintainer response.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"This is a fresh issue (4 days old) from maintainer mr-cal with no labels, no assignee, and zero comments. While the request is clear—remove redundant isinstance(data, dict) checks that were added before strict type checking (PR #1294) gave them confidence in the type system—no maintainer has yet acknowledged or triaged it. The grep found ~12 occurrences across multiple files that would need review.","scores":{"impact":35,"quick_win":26.25,"staleness":5,"complexity":25,"confidence":75,"support_request":0},"age_days":11,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-09-01T19:35:39+00:00","updated_at":"2026-09-11T02:32:06+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":5,"complexity":25,"support_request":0,"confidence":75,"impact":35,"quick_win":26.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":47394,"project_name":"craft-application","source":"github","external_id":"1180","title":"build(deps): update pre-commit hook astral-sh/ruff-pre-commit to v0.16.7 (main)","author":"renovate","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-application/pull/1180","summary":"Automated patch update of ruff-pre-commit from v0.16.6 to v0.16.7 via Renovate. Fresh PR with automerge enabled, minimal diff (+1/-1 lines), some CI checks failing.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"This is a fresh, automated dependency update PR with automerge enabled and a minimal diff (+1/-1 lines). It's part of a routine patch version update pattern across the ecosystem (multiple similar PRs found in related issues). The failing lint CI checks may be transient and should resolve once the dependency version is updated.","scores":{"impact":10,"quick_win":9.5,"staleness":5,"complexity":5,"confidence":85},"age_days":0,"labels":["PR: Dependencies"],"created_at":"2026-09-13T03:47:58+00:00","updated_at":"2026-09-13T03:48:00+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":5,"complexity":5,"support_request":null,"confidence":85,"impact":10,"quick_win":9.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":42343,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2813","title":"feat(profile): add example action to kubernetes and machine init profiles","author":"tonyandrewmeyer","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/pull/2813","summary":"Adds example pause/resume actions to machine profile and restart action to kubernetes profile in charmcraft init templates. Approved by 4 reviewers, CI passing, 1 unresolved review comment.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"The PR has 4 reviewer approvals and passing CI checks, indicating it is ready to land. The single unresolved review comment appears to be a minor question from @dwilding that doesn't block merging. The changes add example actions to init templates, which is a straightforward template update.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":37.5,"staleness":5,"complexity":25,"confidence":85},"age_days":48,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-07-27T08:38:50+00:00","updated_at":"2026-09-12T01:13:54+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":5,"complexity":25,"support_request":null,"confidence":85,"impact":50,"quick_win":37.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":39101,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"6290","title":"docs: Add documentation for new BASH syntax","author":"sergio-costas","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/pull/6290","summary":"Documentation update adding BASH syntax support for environment variables to snapcraft docs. Approved by 2 reviewers, all CI passing, 2 unresolved review comments.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"PR has 2 approvals and all CI checks passing, but 2 unresolved review comments remain. The documentation change is straightforward (+12/-0 lines) and addresses a real feature (BASH syntax support in snapd 2.77+). A maintainer should review and address the unresolved comments before merging.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":22.5,"staleness":5,"complexity":10,"confidence":80},"age_days":93,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-06-12T08:39:42+00:00","updated_at":"2026-09-05T19:30:11+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":5,"complexity":10,"support_request":null,"confidence":80,"impact":25,"quick_win":22.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":5992,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"5916","title":"Add workflow to auto-close mistake issues","author":"copilot-swe-agent","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/pull/5916","summary":"Adds a GitHub Actions workflow to auto-close issues opened by mistake (URL-only titles, unfilled placeholder templates). Actively iterated: maintainer requested coverage for #5913, agent committed fix; review pending, PR title fails Conventional Commits check.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"Last activity was 1 day ago when @lengau asked the agent to also detect issues like #5913 and the agent committed ab33404 in response, so it is actively under a review cycle with 2 unresolved review comments and 0 reviewers. The failing 'policy / Check PR title for Conventional Commits' check ('Add workflow to auto-close mistake issues' lacks a type prefix) needs an author fix before landing. No evidence the feature was implemented elsewhere (no close-mistake-issues workflow or related commits found in the repo).","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":15.0,"staleness":5,"complexity":25,"confidence":75},"age_days":278,"labels":[],"created_at":"2025-12-08T21:23:10+00:00","updated_at":"2026-08-30T18:24:13+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":5,"complexity":25,"support_request":null,"confidence":75,"impact":20,"quick_win":15.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":46461,"project_name":"fetch-service","source":"github","external_id":"647","title":"fix(deps): update module golang.org/x/net to v0.59.0","author":"renovate","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/fetch-service/pull/647","summary":"Routine dependency update for golang.org/x/net v0.58.0→v0.59.0 with related module updates; CI failing on linters, unit-tests, and OSV-scanner; awaiting maintainer review.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"Fresh PR (1 day old) with routine dependency updates that requires maintainer review to investigate CI failures on linters, unit-tests, and OSV-scanner before merging.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":22.5,"staleness":5,"complexity":10,"confidence":65},"age_days":4,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-09-09T00:27:43+00:00","updated_at":"2026-09-09T00:27:44+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":5,"complexity":10,"support_request":null,"confidence":65,"impact":25,"quick_win":22.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":45038,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2854","title":"charmcraft pack ignores -o option in version 4.4.1","author":"jw-can","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/2854","summary":"charmcraft pack ignores the -o output directory option in version 4.4.1. The issue is fresh, unlabelled, and awaiting maintainer triage.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is fresh (9 days old) and lacks maintainer labels or comments. It reports a clear bug where the -o output directory option is ignored during charmcraft pack, requiring maintainer verification and prioritization.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":35.0,"staleness":5,"complexity":30,"confidence":80,"support_request":10},"age_days":16,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-08-27T16:03:39+00:00","updated_at":"2026-08-27T16:03:54+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":5,"complexity":30,"support_request":10,"confidence":80,"impact":50,"quick_win":35.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":21838,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1247","title":"python plugin: Support `disable-parallel` parameter","author":"lengau","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/1247","summary":"Enhancement to add the disable-parallel part property to the python plugin, with a proposed 3-state design (None/True/False) for parallel wheel builds. Labeled Needs information; maintainers discussing design and awaiting a real-world use case.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is triaged (Type: Enhancement, Status: Needs information) and actively discussed: lengau proposed a 3-state None/True/False design in 2025-09-02, and cmatsuoka's 2026-08-30 question about equivalence with CRAFT_PARALLEL_BUILD_COUNT=1 shows the design debate is ongoing. It is explicitly deferred until a real-world use case (e.g. python-apt, pydantic-core) is provided, so it should remain open pending that input.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":6.0,"staleness":5,"complexity":60,"confidence":85,"support_request":10},"age_days":375,"labels":["Type: Enhancement","Status: Needs information"],"created_at":"2025-09-02T15:26:56+00:00","updated_at":"2026-08-30T12:43:15+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":5,"complexity":60,"support_request":10,"confidence":85,"impact":15,"quick_win":6.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":45519,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1703","title":"Handle ELOOP while copying symlink metadata on virtiofs","author":"gcomneno","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/issues/1703","summary":"Bug report to handle ELOOP errors when copying symlink metadata on virtiofs. Fresh issue with root cause analysis and proposed fix; no maintainer response yet.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is fresh (5 days old) with a clear bug report, root cause analysis, and proposed solution, but has no maintainer response or assignee. It has a 'Type: Bug' label but no maintainer acknowledgment. The issue references canonical/charmcraft#2661 and #2864 which confirm the problem, but craft-parts maintainers have not yet weighed in on the proposed fix approach.","scores":{"impact":60,"quick_win":33.0,"staleness":5,"complexity":45,"confidence":85,"support_request":10},"age_days":12,"labels":["Type: Bug"],"created_at":"2026-08-31T10:21:59+00:00","updated_at":"2026-09-02T14:57:23+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":5,"complexity":45,"support_request":10,"confidence":85,"impact":60,"quick_win":33.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":45160,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2858","title":"Implement metadata mediation for actions.yaml and config.yaml","author":"cmatsuoka","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/2858","summary":"Feature request to implement metadata mediation for actions.yaml and config.yaml to prevent unnecessary artifact recreation. Triaged and created 8 days ago.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"This is a triaged feature request created 8 days ago by a maintainer, clearly scoped and required for the testing workflow. It mirrors the pattern from #2856 (metadata.yaml mediation) and represents a real implementation task rather than a support question or stale issue.","scores":{"impact":60,"quick_win":33.0,"staleness":5,"complexity":45,"confidence":85,"support_request":0},"age_days":15,"labels":["Status: Triaged"],"created_at":"2026-08-28T13:13:49+00:00","updated_at":"2026-08-28T13:14:06+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":5,"complexity":45,"support_request":0,"confidence":85,"impact":60,"quick_win":33.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":45152,"project_name":"imagecraft","source":"github","external_id":"429","title":"Set `Application.allow_spread_yaml` to false","author":"mr-cal","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/imagecraft/issues/429","summary":"Maintainer task to set Application.allow_spread_yaml to false after updating craft-application to 7.3+. Currently pinned to 7.2, not yet implemented.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"This is a fresh (8 days old), triaged maintainer task with a clear action: update craft-application from ~=7.2 to >=7.3 and set allow_spread_yaml=False. The related debcraft#187 confirms this is a coordinated cleanup across craft projects after PR #1168 migrated test configs away from spread.yaml.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":34.0,"staleness":5,"complexity":15,"confidence":85,"support_request":0},"age_days":15,"labels":["Status: Triaged"],"created_at":"2026-08-28T12:42:45+00:00","updated_at":"2026-08-28T18:10:51+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":5,"complexity":15,"support_request":0,"confidence":85,"impact":40,"quick_win":34.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":46407,"project_name":"imagecraft","source":"github","external_id":"437","title":"feat: zero-mount bootloader installation","author":"lengau","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/imagecraft/pull/437","summary":"Replaces privileged loop-device GRUB installation with pre-format-staging bootloader installer, removing loop device requirements for EFI/BIOS boot code installation. All CI passing, 0 reviewers.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"This is a fresh PR (2 days old) with a major architectural refactoring of bootloader installation (+2722/-1262 lines across 29 files) that replaces the entire loop-device + chroot GRUB approach with a pre-format-staging mechanism. All CI checks pass, but there are 0 reviewers and 0 comments, so it needs maintainer review before merging. The detailed review instructions in the PR body indicate the author expects careful examination of the integration flow, filesystem ID consistency, and chroot environment boundaries.","scores":{"impact":75,"quick_win":11.25,"staleness":5,"complexity":85,"confidence":75},"age_days":4,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-09-08T20:26:08+00:00","updated_at":"2026-09-11T11:47:15+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":5,"complexity":85,"support_request":null,"confidence":75,"impact":75,"quick_win":11.25,"has_related_links":false},{"id":47134,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2876","title":"test: add retry on reactive tests","author":"bepri","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/pull/2876","summary":"Adds retry logic to flaky reactive tests to reduce test failures. Small change (+6/-2 lines) approved by 1 reviewer, but some CI checks are failing.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"PR is approved by 1 reviewer but some CI checks are failing (snap-tests on ubuntu-20.04-64, snap-store-tests, snap-tests on ubuntu-22.04-64, snap-tests on ubuntu-25.10-64). The change is small and straightforward, but failing CI needs investigation before merging.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":18.0,"staleness":5,"complexity":10,"confidence":75},"age_days":3,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-09-09T20:28:39+00:00","updated_at":"2026-09-11T19:52:01+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":5,"complexity":10,"support_request":null,"confidence":75,"impact":20,"quick_win":18.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":45467,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1699","title":"feat: partitions always enabled","author":"cmatsuoka","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/pull/1699","summary":"Consolidates enabled/disabled partition code paths into a unified approach where no partitions defaults to a single partition. CI passing, awaiting review.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"The PR is fresh (7 days old, last activity today), CI is fully passing, and it consolidates partition code paths across 31 files. It has no reviewers yet and is pending review. The related snapcraft#6397 PR suggests this feature is being coordinated across projects, warranting maintainer attention.","scores":{"impact":55,"quick_win":24.75,"staleness":5,"complexity":55,"confidence":70},"age_days":13,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-08-30T21:30:00+00:00","updated_at":"2026-09-07T03:00:34+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":5,"complexity":55,"support_request":null,"confidence":70,"impact":55,"quick_win":24.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":47399,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2881","title":"build(deps): update pre-commit hook astral-sh/ruff-pre-commit to v0.16.7 (main)","author":"renovate","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/pull/2881","summary":"Routine Renovate dependency update for ruff-pre-commit v0.16.6 → v0.16.7. All CI checks passing, automerge enabled, trivial 1-line change.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"This is a fresh, automated patch-version dependency update with all CI checks passing and automerge enabled. The change is minimal (+1/-1 line in .pre-commit-config.yaml) and low-risk, making it ready for maintainer review and merge.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":20.0,"staleness":0,"complexity":0,"confidence":90},"age_days":0,"labels":["PR: Dependencies"],"created_at":"2026-09-13T04:03:13+00:00","updated_at":"2026-09-13T04:03:13+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":0,"complexity":0,"support_request":null,"confidence":90,"impact":20,"quick_win":20.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":47348,"project_name":"craft-actions","source":"github","external_id":"114","title":"chore(deps): update pnpm to v12.4.1","author":"renovate","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-actions/pull/114","summary":"Updates pnpm from 12.3.4 to 12.4.1 to fix filesystem hard link failures and improve repeat install performance. CI is passing, PR is fresh and awaiting maintainer review.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"This is a fresh, automated dependency update with all CI checks passing. It follows the project's established pattern of routine Renovate bumps and addresses minor bug fixes in pnpm 12.4.1, so it requires a maintainer review to approve and merge.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":19.0,"staleness":0,"complexity":5,"confidence":90},"age_days":1,"labels":["PR: Dependencies"],"created_at":"2026-09-12T07:50:45+00:00","updated_at":"2026-09-12T19:49:12+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":0,"complexity":5,"support_request":null,"confidence":90,"impact":20,"quick_win":19.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":47350,"project_name":"craft-cli","source":"github","external_id":"484","title":"build(deps): update pre-commit hook astral-sh/ruff-pre-commit to v0.16.7 (main)","author":"renovate","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-cli/pull/484","summary":"Updates astral-sh/ruff-pre-commit from v0.16.5 to v0.16.7. Fresh PR with automerge enabled, mostly passing CI.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"This is a fresh, automated dependency update PR with automerge enabled. All CI checks pass except for lint/files, which may be a transient issue unrelated to the version bump. The PR is awaiting maintainer review for approval and merge.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":20.0,"staleness":0,"complexity":0,"confidence":80},"age_days":1,"labels":["PR: Dependencies"],"created_at":"2026-09-12T08:00:58+00:00","updated_at":"2026-09-13T03:08:04+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":0,"complexity":0,"support_request":null,"confidence":80,"impact":20,"quick_win":20.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":45711,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2865","title":"docs: charmcraft release reference is badly formatted","author":"marcusboden","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/2865","summary":"Documentation for `charmcraft release` command has formatting issues: `<None>` placeholders in usage, unformatted channel examples, and broken resource example formatting.","suggested_action":"needs_triage","suggested_action_reason":"The issue reports specific documentation formatting problems (e.g., `<None>` placeholders, missing lists/codeblocks) but has no labels or maintainer comments yet. It requires triage to assign or prioritize the doc fix.","scores":{"impact":10,"quick_win":9.0,"staleness":0,"complexity":10,"confidence":90,"support_request":0},"age_days":11,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-09-01T14:16:50+00:00","updated_at":"2026-09-01T14:16:50+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":0,"complexity":10,"support_request":0,"confidence":90,"impact":10,"quick_win":9.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":47386,"project_name":"imagecraft","source":"github","external_id":"441","title":"build(deps): update pre-commit hook astral-sh/ruff-pre-commit to v0.16.7 (main)","author":"renovate","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/imagecraft/pull/441","summary":"Automated Renovate PR updating astral-sh/ruff-pre-commit from v0.16.6 to v0.16.7. One CI check failing (test-requires-root / Fast tests (ubuntu-24.04)). Diff is +1/-1 lines, 1 file changed.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"This is a fresh, automated dependency update PR (0 days old) with automerge enabled. The change is trivial (+1/-1 lines updating a pre-commit hook version). The single failing CI check (test-requires-root / Fast tests) may be unrelated to this minimal change and should be investigated before closing. Given the PR's freshness and the standard nature of Renovate dependency updates, it should remain open for CI to complete.","scores":{"impact":10,"quick_win":9.5,"staleness":0,"complexity":5,"confidence":85},"age_days":0,"labels":["PR: Dependencies"],"created_at":"2026-09-13T03:02:16+00:00","updated_at":"2026-09-13T03:02:17+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":0,"complexity":5,"support_request":null,"confidence":85,"impact":10,"quick_win":9.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":45913,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"6411","title":"The Python plugin can create conflicting interpreters","author":"bepri","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/6411","summary":"Python plugin creates conflicting interpreters on core26 when staging Python via stage-packages; shebangs should point to /bin/python3","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"The issue is very fresh (5 days old), has been triaged (Status: Triaged label), and describes a clear bug with reproduction steps and a proposed fix (patching shebangs to /bin/python3). The Starcraft team has agreed on the approach, making it ready for implementation.","scores":{"impact":50,"quick_win":25.0,"staleness":0,"complexity":50,"confidence":80,"support_request":0},"age_days":9,"labels":["Status: Triaged"],"created_at":"2026-09-03T13:18:32+00:00","updated_at":"2026-09-09T05:21:52+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":0,"complexity":50,"support_request":0,"confidence":80,"impact":50,"quick_win":25.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":47383,"project_name":"craft-platforms","source":"github","external_id":"269","title":"build(deps): update pre-commit hook astral-sh/ruff-pre-commit to v0.16.7 (main)","author":"renovate","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-platforms/pull/269","summary":"Renovate-generated dependency update bumping astral-sh/ruff-pre-commit from v0.16.6 to v0.16.7. All CI checks passing, automerge enabled, +1/-1 lines changed.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"This is a fresh, routine dependency update PR with all CI checks passing and automerge enabled. It is actively being processed by Renovate and ready to merge automatically without requiring manual intervention.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":19.0,"staleness":0,"complexity":5,"confidence":95},"age_days":0,"labels":["PR: Dependencies"],"created_at":"2026-09-13T03:00:20+00:00","updated_at":"2026-09-13T03:00:21+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":0,"complexity":5,"support_request":null,"confidence":95,"impact":20,"quick_win":19.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":47353,"project_name":"craft-actions","source":"github","external_id":"115","title":"chore(deps): update development dependencies (minor and patch)","author":"renovate","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-actions/pull/115","summary":"Updates @types/node and typescript-eslint dev dependencies to latest minor versions. Fresh PR with passing CI, awaiting maintainer review.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"Fresh Renovate-generated PR updating minor/patch development dependencies with all CI checks passing. Routine dependency updates should be reviewed and merged to keep dependencies current.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":20.0,"staleness":0,"complexity":0,"confidence":90},"age_days":0,"labels":["PR: Dependencies"],"created_at":"2026-09-12T12:08:20+00:00","updated_at":"2026-09-12T12:08:21+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":0,"complexity":0,"support_request":null,"confidence":90,"impact":20,"quick_win":20.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":47380,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1720","title":"feat: better error message for cache prepare failure","author":"cmatsuoka","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/pull/1720","summary":"Adds better error messages when apt cache preparation fails, addressing issue #648. Fresh PR with a failing lint check, awaiting review.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"This is a fresh PR (0 days old) from maintainer cmatsuoka that addresses issue #648 by improving error messages for apt cache preparation failures. It has a failing lint check that needs attention, and no reviewers have been assigned yet. The change is straightforward error handling but requires maintainer review to ensure the error messages are appropriate and the lint issues are resolved.","scores":{"impact":40,"quick_win":34.0,"staleness":0,"complexity":15,"confidence":70},"age_days":0,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-09-13T02:51:42+00:00","updated_at":"2026-09-13T03:00:36+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":0,"complexity":15,"support_request":null,"confidence":70,"impact":40,"quick_win":34.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":47369,"project_name":"craft-store","source":"github","external_id":"424","title":"build(deps): update astral-sh/setup-uv action to v10.1.0 (main)","author":"renovate","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-store/pull/424","summary":"Minor version update to astral-sh/setup-uv GitHub Action from v10.0.1 to v10.1.0. Automated by Renovate with automerge enabled. One CI check failing (test / Minimum dependencies).","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"This is a fresh, automated dependency update (+1/-1 lines) with automerge enabled. One CI check is failing ('test / Minimum dependencies'), which may be unrelated to this GitHub Action update and should be investigated before merging.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":20.0,"staleness":0,"complexity":0,"confidence":80},"age_days":0,"labels":["PR: Dependencies"],"created_at":"2026-09-12T23:08:40+00:00","updated_at":"2026-09-12T23:08:41+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":0,"complexity":0,"support_request":null,"confidence":80,"impact":20,"quick_win":20.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":47333,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1719","title":"Add regression coverage for base-files/usrmerge staging collisions","author":"copilot-swe-agent","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/pull/1719","summary":"Adds regression integration test for base-files/usrmerge staging collisions (issue #1001). Fresh PR with no reviews, CI passing.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"Brand new PR (0 days old) adding regression tests for issue #1001. No maintainer reviews yet. The test is minimal and focused, but needs maintainer assessment before merging, especially since it references 'Fixes #1001' while only adding tests rather than fixing the underlying bug.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":21.25,"staleness":0,"complexity":15,"confidence":70},"age_days":1,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-09-12T01:46:02+00:00","updated_at":"2026-09-12T01:49:58+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":0,"complexity":15,"support_request":null,"confidence":70,"impact":25,"quick_win":21.25,"has_related_links":true},{"id":47396,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1721","title":"build(deps): update pre-commit hook astral-sh/ruff-pre-commit to v0.16.7 (main)","author":"renovate","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/pull/1721","summary":"Renovate-generated dependency update bumping astral-sh/ruff-pre-commit from v0.16.6 to v0.16.7. Automerge enabled. Two CI checks failing on s390x and minimum dependencies, likely unrelated to this pre-commit hook change.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Fresh dependency update PR with automerge enabled. The two failing CI checks (test-java-plugins on s390x, test-common minimum dependencies) are unrelated to a pre-commit hook version bump and likely represent pre-existing flakiness or architecture-specific issues. The PR should remain open for CI to complete and for automerge to proceed once passing.","scores":{"impact":10,"quick_win":9.5,"staleness":0,"complexity":5,"confidence":85},"age_days":0,"labels":["PR: Dependencies"],"created_at":"2026-09-13T03:45:09+00:00","updated_at":"2026-09-13T03:45:11+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":0,"complexity":5,"support_request":null,"confidence":85,"impact":10,"quick_win":9.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":47392,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2879","title":"docs: TYPE YOUR QUESTION HERE","author":"thantzin7383y-bot","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/issues/2879","summary":"Template issue opened without any actual content; body contains only placeholder text asking the user to describe their question.","suggested_action":"close_not_a_bug","suggested_action_reason":"The issue body contains only the default template text ('TYPE YOUR QUESTION HERE' and '*Please describe the question or issue you're facing with \"Charmcraft 4.4 documentation\".') with no actual question, bug report, or details provided. This is not a valid issue — it is an empty template submission that should be closed as not a bug.","scores":{"impact":0,"quick_win":0.0,"staleness":0,"complexity":0,"confidence":95,"support_request":100},"age_days":0,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-09-13T03:49:35+00:00","updated_at":"2026-09-13T03:49:35+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":0,"complexity":0,"support_request":100,"confidence":95,"impact":0,"quick_win":0.0,"has_related_links":false},{"id":47391,"project_name":"craft-store","source":"github","external_id":"425","title":"build(deps): update pre-commit hook astral-sh/ruff-pre-commit to v0.16.7 (main)","author":"renovate","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-store/pull/425","summary":"Automated patch update of astral-sh/ruff-pre-commit from v0.16.6 to v0.16.7. All CI passing, automerge enabled, 1-line change.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"Fresh Renovate-generated dependency update with all CI checks passing and automerge enabled. The PR will merge automatically without manual intervention, consistent with standard dependency update workflow.","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":20.0,"staleness":0,"complexity":0,"confidence":90},"age_days":0,"labels":["PR: Dependencies"],"created_at":"2026-09-13T03:36:54+00:00","updated_at":"2026-09-13T03:36:55+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":0,"complexity":0,"support_request":null,"confidence":90,"impact":20,"quick_win":20.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":46309,"project_name":"craft-parts","source":"github","external_id":"1714","title":"refactor: format partition errors inside error class","author":"cmatsuoka","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/craft-parts/pull/1714","summary":"Refactors partition error classes to receive unformatted data structures instead of pre-formatted strings. Fixes craft-parts#670. PR is 0 days old with pending CI checks and 2 unresolved review comments.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"This is a brand new PR (0 days old) authored by a maintainer (cmatsuoka) that refactors partition error classes to receive unformatted data structures, fixing issue #670. It has 2 unresolved review comments and several pending CI checks, indicating it is actively under review and not yet ready to merge.","scores":{"impact":25,"quick_win":17.5,"staleness":0,"complexity":30,"confidence":70},"age_days":5,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-09-08T00:00:04+00:00","updated_at":"2026-09-08T00:51:06+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":0,"complexity":30,"support_request":null,"confidence":70,"impact":25,"quick_win":17.5,"has_related_links":true},{"id":47401,"project_name":"debcraft","source":"github","external_id":"190","title":"build(deps): update pre-commit hook astral-sh/ruff-pre-commit to v0.16.7 (main)","author":"renovate","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/debcraft/pull/190","summary":"Renovate PR updating ruff-pre-commit from v0.16.6 to v0.16.7. Fresh PR with all CI checks passing, automerge enabled, 1 line change.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"Fresh Renovate dependency update with passing CI and automerge enabled. Requires maintainer review/merge to land. The change is trivial (+1/-1 line) updating a pre-commit linter hook, consistent with similar updates across the ecosystem (e.g., debcraft#189 for v0.16.6).","scores":{"impact":20,"quick_win":20.0,"staleness":0,"complexity":0,"confidence":90},"age_days":0,"labels":["PR: Dependencies"],"created_at":"2026-09-13T04:06:03+00:00","updated_at":"2026-09-13T04:06:04+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":0,"complexity":0,"support_request":null,"confidence":90,"impact":20,"quick_win":20.0,"has_related_links":true},{"id":47251,"project_name":"fetch-service","source":"github","external_id":"648","title":"chore(deps): update tiobe/tics-github-action action to v4","author":"renovate","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/fetch-service/pull/648","summary":"Renovate PR updating tiobe/tics-github-action from v3 to v4 in .github/workflows/tics.yaml. Fresh PR with passing CI checks, awaiting maintainer review.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"This is a fresh Renovate-generated dependency update (v3 → v4) touching a single workflow file with +1/-1 lines. CI checks are passing (except an unrelated OSV-scanner failure). It requires maintainer review and approval before merging.","scores":{"impact":10,"quick_win":9.5,"staleness":0,"complexity":5,"confidence":90},"age_days":1,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-09-11T11:38:46+00:00","updated_at":"2026-09-11T11:38:47+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":0,"complexity":5,"support_request":null,"confidence":90,"impact":10,"quick_win":9.5,"has_related_links":false},{"id":46013,"project_name":"snapcraft","source":"github","external_id":"6414","title":"Add migration error for candid creds","author":"mr-cal","issue_type":"issue","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft/issues/6414","summary":"Enhancement to detect candid credentials in creds files and raise a user-friendly migration error, complementing existing env var checks.","suggested_action":"keep_open","suggested_action_reason":"This is a triaged enhancement (Status: Triaged label present) that is clearly scoped: detect candid credentials in creds files and raise a migration error. The existing code in snapcraft/commands/account.py already checks SNAPCRAFT_STORE_AUTH=candid for login/export-login commands, but the issue specifically requests also parsing the creds file to detect candid credentials stored there. It was opened 4 days ago by a maintainer and is ready for implementation.","scores":{"impact":55,"quick_win":35.75,"staleness":0,"complexity":35,"confidence":75,"support_request":10},"age_days":8,"labels":["Status: Triaged","Type: Enhancement"],"created_at":"2026-09-04T12:29:57+00:00","updated_at":"2026-09-08T18:41:51+00:00","author_is_maintainer":true,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":0,"complexity":35,"support_request":10,"confidence":75,"impact":55,"quick_win":35.75,"has_related_links":true},{"id":47334,"project_name":"charmcraft","source":"github","external_id":"2878","title":"build(lint): replicate rockcraft tombi integration in two commits","author":"copilot-swe-agent","issue_type":"pull_request","state":"open","url":"https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/pull/2878","summary":"Adds tombi TOML formatting support to charmcraft, mirroring rockcraft#1363. Split into two commits: non-TOML build/lint wiring and TOML formatting sweep. CI passing, awaiting maintainer review.","suggested_action":"needs_review","suggested_action_reason":"This is a fresh PR (0 days old) with CI passing that adds tombi TOML formatting support, mirroring work done in rockcraft#1363. The PR body mentions it was 'split as requested', suggesting prior maintainer feedback. It needs a maintainer review to approve the build/lint changes and the TOML formatting sweep.","scores":{"impact":15,"quick_win":12.0,"staleness":0,"complexity":20,"confidence":75},"age_days":1,"labels":[],"created_at":"2026-09-12T02:04:48+00:00","updated_at":"2026-09-12T02:15:31+00:00","author_is_maintainer":false,"author_is_bot":false,"staleness":0,"complexity":20,"support_request":null,"confidence":75,"impact":15,"quick_win":12.0,"has_related_links":true}]